Who Uses Bottled Gas? Evidence from Households in Developing Countries

Household surveys in Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka were analyzed using a two-stage Heckman model to examine the factors influencing the decision to use liquefied petroleum gas (stage 1) and, among users, the quantity consumed per person (stage 2). In the first stage, liquefied petroleum gas selection in all six countries increased with household expenditure and the highest level of education attained by female and male household members. Electricity connection increased, and engagement in agriculture and increasing household size decreased, liquefied petroleum gas selection in five countries; urban residence increased selection in four countries; and rising firewood and kerosene prices increased selection in three countries each. In the second stage, the quantity of liquefied petroleum gas consumed increased with rising household expenditure and decreasing price of liquefied petroleum gas in every country. Urban residence increased and engagement in agriculture decreased liquefied petroleum gas consumption. Surveys in Albania, Brazil, Mexico, and Peru, which did not report quantities, were also examined by calculating quantities using national average prices. Although fuel prices faced by individual households could not be tested, the findings largely supported those from the first six countries. Once the education levels of men and women were separately accounted for, the gender of the head of household was not statistically significant in most cases across the ten countries. Where it was significant (five equations), the sign of the coefficient was positive for men, possibly suggesting that female-headed households are burdened with unmeasured economic disadvantages, making less cash available for purchasing liquefied petroleum gas.

[1]  R. Stott,et al.  The World Bank , 2008, Annals of tropical medicine and parasitology.

[2]  Margaret Irish,et al.  Statistical models for zero expenditures in household budgets , 1984 .

[3]  Debra K. Israel Fuel Choice in Developing Countries:Evidence from Bolivia* , 2002, Economic Development and Cultural Change.

[4]  Daniel M. Kammen,et al.  From Linear Fuel Switching to Multiple Cooking Strategies: A Critique and Alternative to the Energy Ladder Model , 2000 .

[5]  Shonali Pachauri,et al.  Fuel choices in urban Indian households , 2005, Environment and Development Economics.

[6]  A. Deaton The Analysis of Household Surveys : A Microeconometric Approach to Development Policy , 1997 .

[7]  J. Guilbert The world health report 2002 - reducing risks, promoting healthy life. , 2003, Education for health.

[8]  Costas Meghir,et al.  BIVARIATE ALTERNATIVES TO THE TOBIT MODEL , 1987 .

[9]  Richard K. Lattanzio The World Bank Group Energy Sector Strategy , 2013 .

[10]  Masami Kojima,et al.  Changing patterns of household expenditures on energy : a case study of Indonesia and Pakistan , 2009 .

[11]  M O Pundo,et al.  Multinomial logit analysis of household cooking fuel choice in rural Kenya: The case of Kisumu district , 2006 .

[12]  Gunnar Köhlin,et al.  Preferences for domestic fuel: Analysis with socio-economic factors and rankings in Kolkata, India , 2006 .

[13]  Masami Kojima,et al.  Government Response to Oil Price Volatility : Experience of 49 Developing Countries , 2009 .

[14]  R. Hoffmann,et al.  Deriving conditional and unconditional marginal effects in log earnings equations estimated by Heckman's procedure , 2005 .

[15]  June,et al.  Household Fuel Use and Fuel Switching in Guatemala , 2003 .

[16]  Kerry Krutilla,et al.  The Urban Household Energy Transition: Social and Environmental Impacts in the Developing World , 2005 .

[17]  Jeffrey M. Woodbridge Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , 2002 .

[18]  鳥居 泰彦,et al.  世界経済・社会統計 = World development indicators , 1998 .

[19]  W. Greene Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error: Comment , 1981 .

[20]  G. Köhlin,et al.  Determinants of Household Fuel Choice in Major Cities in Ethiopia , 2009 .