1. Cross-country analysis / community level case studies, Implications for work, health and living standards Margherita Tinti November 26, 2008

2.  Srilatha Batliwala (1995) Energy as an Obstacle to Improved Living Standards in Goldemberg, Johansson: Energy as an Instrument for Socio- Economic Development  Njeri Womukonya (2004) Women and Energy: Issues in Developing Nations  Roger Revelle (1976) Energy Use in Rural India  Paul Wilkinson (2008): Energy and Health – A global perspective on energy: health effects and injustices  Daniel Spreng (2004): Distribution of Energy Consumption and the 2000W/capita target

4. Chief characteristic of poverty: basic human needs – food, shelter, health care, education, and livelihoods – remain unfulfilled. The real determinant of poverty is the level of services that energy provides. The poor use energy very inefficiently: the technologies available are inefficient inadequate inanimate energy Main assumption: Poverty and scarcity of energy services go hand in hand, and exist in a synergistic relationship. Goal: Increasing magnitude ofenergy consumption Improving the efficiency of energy utilization.

5. Pura 1977, India: Generally validated for developing countries – with variations. The nature of energy consumption patterns at the village level = basis to understand how levels of energy services become an obstacle to improving living standards EnergyActivities requ. energy Inanimate energy 92% Commercial energy 3% 2%kerosenelighting2% 1%electricity 65% for  28% for  7% for  100% Agriculture (23%) Lighting Industry 3% 4% 97%* 89%fuel wood 80% for  Domestic activities Domestic cooking 91% 100% Animate* en ergy 8% 7% human energy 19% for  Domestic cooking 1% bullock energy Agriculture (77%)3% 100%

6. Poor pay high price for low levels of energy services  High time expenditure for energy procurement  Time which could be used for more productive or life- enhancing activities.  Ecological price  of the poor’s forced dependence on inefficient biomass- based technologies (e.g. open cook stoves).  Economic costs also at the national level  agriculture and industry are essential to economic growth in poor countries.  Disproportionate influence on energy distribution of politically powerful groups.

7. Dependence on scarce biomass to meet daily subsistence needs Low fuel efficiency – emissions with alarming health effects Scarcity and high time of labour cost  preparing fewer hot meals  undercooking  switching to cereal staples that require less cooking, but may be less nutritious Lack of adequate water for bathing and washing high rate of genito-urinary and reproductive tract infections (RTIs) in poor women. malnutrition, poor immunity, morbidity and mortality from infectious diseases, anaemia, maternal/female morbidity and mortality, poor reproductive health, depletion of women’s health from repeated childbearing, overwork, and inadequate food.

8. Dependence on human energy and primitive technologies  obstacles to social and gender equality:  trapped in an unceasing cycle of work  no access to education  no empowerment, barrier to new knowledge, barrier to question, barrier to criticise  demand for children’s labour  need for large families  high birth rates  depletion of health of women  limiting participation in change processes and development programs.

9. Relevance  No holistic solutions.  Comparison with situation in urban areas is one-sided, not differentiated enough.  No inclusion of general energy discussion. Complexity  Problems are well described  Clear structure  Easy to read and understand  Conventional, not innovative Future directions or further questions  Discussion low-tech versus high-tech.  How much energy does a human being need?

10. Research Question Women and energy in the developing country is being advanced to enhance gender equity. – Does this make sense? Methods Evidence in empirical studies, comparison of studies Many different sources Seems very well researched Structure: Question - Answer Open questions in the last chapter

11. Financial status of households is important when talking about energy problem. Access to modern energy forms  rarely available in rural areas  Predominant limiting factor to their consumption is cost.  The importance of availability of modern fuels cannot be underestimated in influencing shifts from fuelwood.  By paying more attention to trends that are unrelated to gender issues, strategies can be established to enable households to shift. Urbanisation Time, labour, and drudgery associated with fuelwood procurement in rural areas are less important. Access to money is more so.  poverty is the main determinant of access to biomass fuels.

12. Dependent on various external factors that are not always taken into account in stove programs 1980s: most of the improved stove projects failed:  poor targeting – women were excluded.  stoves do not always achieve the expected fuel savings. Positive impact:  improved health (for men and women) and timesaving for the users.  Women producing and promoting the stoves earned some additional money  significantly higher standard of living.  Having free time does have welfare benefits.  Monetary value of women’s time  makes a difference only if involved in income generating values.

13. Not only women and children but also adult men suffer indoor pollution-associated ailments. Half a million children and women die in India annually from indoor air pollution. Procurement of energy may also have health impact on women (weight). Fuel scarcity is noted to force women to move to foods that cook faster or to eat more raw foods, increasing health risks to entire families. Indoor pollution effects in low-income urban households are likely to be more aggravated than in rural areas due to overcrowding and other outdoor pollution effects. Although it has been reported that indoor air pollution causes birth related complications, including prenatal mortality and low birth weight, there is hardly any statistically representative work that validates this.

14. 3 main types of interventions to reduce exposure to indoor air pollution:  relating to source (emissions)  Most effective intervention: shift from wood or charcoal to kerosene, LPG, biogas, or grid electricity.  Improving stove maintenance practices  living environment (concentration)  improving the quality of ventilation practices  Chimneys: reduction in the incidence rate of lung cancer.  increase combustion rate  fuel savings are compromised  transfer the pollution problem from the kitchen to the vicinity of the dwelling  behaviour of the user (exposure)  reducing the time spent close to burning fires and duration of burning  Changes have cost and labour implications  Changes have cost and labour implications

15.  Most of the wood produced through afforestation practices is destined to become timber rather than fuel.  Women prefer trees for fuel, fodder and fruit, whereas men prefer timber trees because of women’s unique responsibility for day-to-day care of their families.  Projects to involve women in tree planting for fuelwood  efforts are not justified given that communities naturally undertake the necessary activities without external intervention.

16. Bulk of the time expenditure, drudgery, and health impacts related to energy procurement by women is in reference to cooking fuels  rural electrification cannot solve this unless it is provided for cooking.  electricity production costs must be low  Decentralized electrification  mini and micro hydro systems  household photovoltaic systems  Capital cost is a major barrier to accessing these systems, whose promotion has been justified on cost effectiveness.  Electrification affects leisure time available to women and provides channels to increase knowledge and awareness through facilitating reading and watching television.  Women tend to see the benefit of electricity differently than do men.  Women: reduce workloads, better health, reduced expenditures  Men: leisure, quality of life, education of children

17. Decentralised energy technologies: women have direct control of acquisition, design, placement, and consumption decisions  less control over male-dominated, utility-centred grid systems. Cooking and energy-saving appliances are accorded lower priority than are luxury goods. Improve women’s decision making powers: training on maintenance and instalment of PV systems, including solar cookers Women politicians are not always able to alter energy decision making to cater for women’s concerns  general lack of comprehensive understanding of the policy impacts and interference by stakeholders with vested interests. Offices meant to integrate gender into policy and action plans: isolated and without links to other relevant ministerial or external stakeholders.

18. Many of the projects fail because  Projects are evaluated less stringently than their male counterparts. The failure erodes confidence in women as business entrepreneurs.  Most credit programmes provide only small loans that are typically insufficient to generate a sustained process of capitalization.  The women only approach can be detrimental to the overall objective.  institutions are isolated from the conventional male-dominated business world  limits networking  Saving time will help women to engage in more productive activities only if already involved in IGA: Time freed from fuel wood gathering is spent on housework and not necessarily on leisure or income-generating activities. The main reason: lack of opportunities and lack of capital  Access to credit for energy has not particularly improved women’s poverty status in any significant way.

19. Relevance?  Compared to 1: includes more comprehensive comparisons with urban areas  No inclusion of general energy discussion. – not necessary because he does not present more energy as THE solution. Complexity?  Differentiated approach.  Goes further than conventional one-sided ideas Future directions or further questions?  Energy – service: what does it replace- what function did this have other than the most obvious one? At what price does more energy come!?

20. Intra- and international distribution of energy consumption and their implications for intergenerational equity:  Where is the sustainability limit of energy consumption inequality?

21. Emission levels in 2050: about what they are today (IPCC, 2000)  all 3 ways of drastically reducing CO2 emissions take time.  Carbon-free primary energy resources: require large investments.  Carbon sequestration: expensive + safety problems  be too slow to meet the 2050 CO2-emission requirements  Development of new highly efficient technologies: low-energy prices  Energy conservation through increased efficiency - most cost effective option - could be introduced without delay. Upper limit of global average per capita energy consumption calculated from the climate model!  Path to stabilisation: 2050: CO2 emissions: 8Gt/year  World population: 8 billion people  1t/year/ capita On the basis of today’s average carbon content in primary energy: 2000W/capita (if carbon content in primary energy is reduced by half: 4000W/capita – very ambitious)

22.  Above the poverty level: minimum level of energy consumption = direct energy required to satisfy basic needs.  Calculation: Direct primary energy per time unit to satisfy basic needs: 500W per person.  Including indirect energy consumption (foods, clothing and shelter): 1000W/capita  Normative step: definition of basic needs With continued globalisation the perception of poverty will also change and the normative determination is likely to increase rapidly.

23.  There is some measure of inequality that leads to social conflict.  The existence of a lower limit of energy consumption is accepted ◦ for monetary measures and ◦ for the per capita energy consumption. The upper, ecological limit to the average per capita energy consumption does not exist for monetary measures.  Limited spread in energy consumption is necessary for sustainability

24. Equity (Rawls)  The state of affairs of the poorest: if over the course of time the plight of the poor improves in a nation, the distribution of wealth becomes more just.  Not responsible for how other people distribute their wealth but we share responsibility for international treaties, conventions and dealings.  If they lead to injustice and contribute to keeping people in less well-of countries poor, we, in the richer countries are responsible. Solidarity  the idea of the 2000 W/capita society, is utopian in its meaning.  Energy policy should be directed at reducing per capita energy consumption. By how much we reduce our own energy consumption is a question of solidarity.

25.  Relevance? Gives the global perspective  Complexity? Well structured Concise  Future directions or further questions? Can we count on solidarity ?