Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2410.02075

Food Without Fire: Nutritional and Environmental Impacts from a Solar Stove Field Experiment

Abstract

Population pressure is speeding the rate of deforestation in Sub-Saharan Africa, increasing the cost of biomass cooking fuel, which over 80 percent of the population relies upon. Higher energy input costs for meal preparation command a larger portion of household spending which in turn induces families to focus their diet on quick cooking staples. We use a field experiment in Zambia to investigate the impact of solar cook stoves on meal preparation choices and expenditures on biomass fuel. Participants kept a detailed food diary recording every ingredient and fuel source used in preparing every dish at every meal for every day during the six weeks of the experiment. This produces a data set of 93,606 ingredients used in the preparation of 30,314 dishes. While treated households used the solar stoves to prepare around 40 percent of their dishes, the solar stove treatment did not significantly increase measures of nutritional diversity nor did treated households increase the number of dishes per meal or reduce the number of meals they skipped. However, treated households significantly reduced the amount of time and money spent on obtaining fuel for cooking. These results suggest that solar stoves, while not changing a household's dietary composition, does relax cooking fuel constraints, allowing households to prepare more meals by reducing the share of household expenditure that goes to meal preparation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Laura E. McCann, Jeffrey D. Michler, Maybin Mwangala, Osaretin Olurotimi, Natalia Estrada Carmona. 2024-10-02. Food Without Fire: Nutritional and Environmental Impacts from a Solar Stove Field Experiment. https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.02075

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN