IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v181y2023ics0301421523003130.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biogas technology adoption and household welfare perspectives for sustainable development

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmad, Munir
  • Jabeen, Gul

Abstract

Despite the paramount importance of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly affordable and sustainable energy (i.e., SDG-7), the existing literature largely overlooked the household welfare gains associated with biogas. Using survey data from 971 Pakistani rural households, we employed probit regression to estimate the determinants of biogas production technology (BGPT) adoption and propensity score matching to predict the household welfare contributions of BGPT. Our results indicate that (i) a positive shock to formal and informal credit borrowing increases the likelihood of BGPT adoption by agricultural households, with informal credit borrowing showing twice the influence of formal credit. (ii) Agricultural households perceive the BGPT as a cost-ineffective solution; however, households’ aesthetic preferences are neutral in BGPT adoption. Regarding the household welfare perspectives of biogas adoption, (iii) adopter households have reduced fuel collection time and additional labor time and exhibit larger crop gains and organic food supply than nonadopters. (iv) BGPT-adopting households are likely to spend less on healthcare, indicating a lower likelihood of falling ill. Finally, (v) adopters are less likely to harm the environment as they use less firewood and fossil fuels. Based on empirical results, our policy implications contribute to multiple SDGs.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmad, Munir & Jabeen, Gul, 2023. "Biogas technology adoption and household welfare perspectives for sustainable development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:181:y:2023:i:c:s0301421523003130
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113728
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421523003130
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113728?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shuming Ren & Lianqing Li & Yueqi Han & Yu Hao & Haitao Wu, 2022. "The emerging driving force of inclusive green growth: Does digital economy agglomeration work?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1656-1678, May.
    2. Diebold, Francis X. & Chen, Celia, 1996. "Testing structural stability with endogenous breakpoint A size comparison of analytic and bootstrap procedures," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 221-241, January.
    3. A. Smith, Jeffrey & E. Todd, Petra, 2005. "Does matching overcome LaLonde's critique of nonexperimental estimators?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 125(1-2), pages 305-353.
    4. Manash Ranjan Gupta & Sarbajit Chaudhuri, 1997. "Formal Credit, Corruption and the Informal Credit Market in Agriculture: a Theoretical Analysis," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(254), pages 331-343, May.
    5. Jan, Inayatullah & Akram, Waqar, 2018. "Willingness of rural communities to adopt biogas systems in Pakistan: Critical factors and policy implications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 3178-3185.
    6. Lyytimäki, Jari & Assmuth, Timo & Paloniemi, Riikka & Pyysiäinen, Jarkko & Rantala, Salla & Rikkonen, Pasi & Tapio, Petri & Vainio, Annukka & Winquist, Erika, 2021. "Two sides of biogas: Review of ten dichotomous argumentation lines of sustainable energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    7. Hewitt, J. & Holden, M. & Robinson, B.L. & Jewitt, S. & Clifford, M.J., 2022. "Not quite cooking on gas: Understanding biogas plant failure and abandonment in Northern Tanzania," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    8. Talevi, Marta & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Das, Ipsita & Lewis, Jessica J. & Singha, Ashok K., 2022. "Speaking from experience: Preferences for cooking with biogas in rural India," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    9. Uhunamure, S.E. & Nethengwe, N.S. & Tinarwo, D., 2019. "Correlating the factors influencing household decisions on adoption and utilisation of biogas technology in South Africa," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 264-273.
    10. Marco Caliendo & Sabine Kopeinig, 2008. "Some Practical Guidance For The Implementation Of Propensity Score Matching," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 31-72, February.
    11. Mikkel Barslund & Finn Tarp, 2008. "Formal and Informal Rural Credit in Four Provinces of Vietnam," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(4), pages 485-503, April.
    12. Bekchanov, Maksud & Mondal, Md. Alam Hossain & de Alwis, Ajith & Mirzabaev, Alisher, 2019. "Why adoption is slow despite promising potential of biogas technology for improving energy security and mitigating climate change in Sri Lanka?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 378-390.
    13. Mukalayi, Nancy Muvumbu & Inglesi-Lotz, Roula, 2023. "Digital financial inclusion and energy and environment: Global positioning of Sub-Saharan African countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    14. Radpour, S. & Gemechu, E. & Ahiduzzaman, Md & Kumar, A., 2021. "Developing a framework to assess the long-term adoption of renewable energy technologies in the electric power sector: The effects of carbon price and economic incentives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    15. Ali, Tausif & Aghaloo, Kamaleddin & Chiu, Yie-Ru & Ahmad, Munir, 2022. "Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic in planning the future energy systems of developing countries using an integrated MCDM approach in the off-grid areas of Bangladesh," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 25-38.
    16. Gupta, Manash Ranjan & Chaudhuri, Sarbajit, 1997. "Formal Credit, Corruption and the Informal Credit Market in Agriculture: A Theoretical Analysis," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(254), pages 331-343, May.
    17. Dahlin, Johannes & Nelles, Michael & Herbes, Carsten, 2017. "Biogas digestate management: Evaluating the attitudes and perceptions of German gardeners towards digestate-based soil amendments," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 27-38.
    18. Charles F. Manski, 2001. "Daniel McFadden and the Econometric Analysis of Discrete Choice," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 103(2), pages 217-230, June.
    19. Kelebe, Haftu Etsay & Ayimut, Kiros Meles & Berhe, Gebresilasse Hailu & Hintsa, Kidane, 2017. "Determinants for adoption decision of small scale biogas technology by rural households in Tigray, Ethiopia," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 272-278.
    20. Zhu, Lin & Liao, Hua & Burke, Paul J., 2023. "Household fuel transitions have substantially contributed to child mortality reductions in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    21. Grainger, Corbett A. & Zhang, Fan, 2019. "Electricity shortages and manufacturing productivity in Pakistan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 1000-1008.
    22. Dogan, Eyup & Madaleno, Mara & Inglesi-Lotz, Roula & Taskin, Dilvin, 2022. "Race and energy poverty: Evidence from African-American households," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    23. Ahmad, Munir & Wu, Yiyun, 2022. "Household-based factors affecting uptake of biogas plants in Bangladesh: Implications for sustainable development," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 858-867.
    24. Sarker, Swati Anindita & Wang, Shouyang & Adnan, K.M. Mehedi & Sattar, M. Nahid, 2020. "Economic feasibility and determinants of biogas technology adoption: Evidence from Bangladesh," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    25. Freytag, J. & Britz, W. & Kuhn, T., 2023. "The economic potential of organic production for stockless arable farms importing biogas digestate: A case study analysis for western Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    26. Cheng, Shulei & Wei, Tianyu & Wang, Feiran & Zhuang, Lu, 2023. "Does financial market participation eradicate household energy poverty?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    27. Bai, Dongbei & Jain, Vipin & Tripathi, Mamta & Ali, Syed Ahtsham & Shabbir, Malik Shahzad & Mohamed, Mady A.A. & Ramos-Meza, Carlos Samuel, 2022. "Performance of biogas plant analysis and policy implications: Evidence from the commercial sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    28. Bai, Chunyue & Zhan, Jinyan & Wang, Huihui & Yang, Zheng & Liu, Huizi & Liu, Wei & Wang, Chao & Chu, Xi & Teng, Yanmin, 2023. "Heating choices and residential willingness to pay for clean heating: Evidence from a household survey in rural China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    29. Jabeen, Gul & Yan, Qingyou & Ahmad, Munir & Fatima, Nousheen & Jabeen, Maria & Li, Heng & Qamar, Shoaib, 2020. "Household-based critical influence factors of biogas generation technology utilization: A case of Punjab province of Pakistan," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 650-660.
    30. He, Pan & Lovo, Stefania & Veronesi, Marcella, 2022. "Social networks and renewable energy technology adoption: Empirical evidence from biogas adoption in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    31. Gebru, Bahre & Elofsson, Katarina, 2023. "The role of forest status in households’ fuel choice in Uganda," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    32. Abadi, Nigussie & Gebrehiwot, Kindeya & Techane, Ataklti & Nerea, Hailish, 2017. "Links between biogas technology adoption and health status of households in rural Tigray, Northern Ethiopia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 284-292.
    33. Yasmin, Nazia & Grundmann, Philipp, 2020. "Home-cooked energy transitions: Women empowerment and biogas-based cooking technology in Pakistan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    34. Ahmad, Munir & Khan, Irfan & Shahzad Khan, Muhammad Qaiser & Jabeen, Gul & Jabeen, Hafiza Samra & Işık, Cem, 2023. "Households' perception-based factors influencing biogas adoption: Innovation diffusion framework," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PE).
    35. Mengistu, Mulu Getachew & Simane, Belay & Eshete, Getachew & Workneh, Tilahun Seyoum, 2016. "Factors affecting households' decisions in biogas technology adoption, the case of Ofla and Mecha Districts, northern Ethiopia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 215-227.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ahmad, Munir & Wu, Yiyun, 2022. "Household-based factors affecting uptake of biogas plants in Bangladesh: Implications for sustainable development," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 858-867.
    2. Jabeen, Gul & Yan, Qingyou & Ahmad, Munir & Fatima, Nousheen & Jabeen, Maria & Li, Heng & Qamar, Shoaib, 2020. "Household-based critical influence factors of biogas generation technology utilization: A case of Punjab province of Pakistan," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 650-660.
    3. Ahmad, Munir & Khan, Irfan & Shahzad Khan, Muhammad Qaiser & Jabeen, Gul & Jabeen, Hafiza Samra & Işık, Cem, 2023. "Households' perception-based factors influencing biogas adoption: Innovation diffusion framework," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PE).
    4. Novice Patrick Bakehe, 2021. "What drives biogas adoption in rural Lesotho?," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 33(2), pages 357-367, June.
    5. Mukeshimana, Marie Claire & Zhao, Zhen-Yu & Ahmad, Munir & Irfan, Muhammad, 2021. "Analysis on barriers to biogas dissemination in Rwanda: AHP approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 1127-1137.
    6. Muhammad Ahmar & Fahad Ali & Yuexiang Jiang & Mamdooh Alwetaishi & Sherif S. M. Ghoneim, 2022. "Households’ Energy Choices in Rural Pakistan," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-23, April.
    7. Abid Hussain & Muhammad Jehangir Khan & Iftikhar Ahmad, 2016. "Impact of Credit on Education and Healthcare Spending in Rural Pakistan," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 55(4), pages 853-870.
    8. Syed M Amir & Yonggong Liu & Ashfaq A Shah & Umer Khayyam & Zafar Mahmood, 2020. "Empirical study on influencing factors of biogas technology adoption in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan," Energy & Environment, , vol. 31(2), pages 308-329, March.
    9. Zhang, Lihui & Wang, Jianing & Li, Songrui, 2022. "Regional suitability analysis of the rural biogas power generation industry:A case of China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 293-306.
    10. Zeng, Yangmei & Zhang, Junbiao & He, Ke, 2019. "Effects of conformity tendencies on households’ willingness to adopt energy utilization of crop straw: Evidence from biogas in rural China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 573-584.
    11. Zhao Xin-gang & Wang Wei & Hu Shuran & Lu Wenjie, 2023. "How to Promote the Application of Biogas Power Technology: A Perspective of Incentive Policy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-11, February.
    12. Andrea Pufahl & Christoph R. Weiss, 2009. "Evaluating the effects of farm programmes: results from propensity score matching," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 36(1), pages 79-101, March.
    13. Dettmann, E. & Becker, C. & Schmeißer, C., 2011. "Distance functions for matching in small samples," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 1942-1960, May.
    14. Jan Fałkowski & Maciej Jakubowski & Paweł Strawiński, 2014. "Returns from income strategies in rural Poland," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 22(1), pages 139-178, January.
    15. Kölling, Arnd, 2013. "Wirtschaftsförderung, Produktivität und betriebliche Arbeitsnachfrage - Eine Kausalanalyse mit Betriebspaneldaten -," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 79843, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. Ullah, Barkat, 2021. "Does innovation explain the performance gap between privatized and private firms?," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    17. Asad K. Ghalib & Issam Malki & Katsushi S. Imai, 2012. "Microfinance and its role in household poverty reduction: findings from Pakistan," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 17312, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    18. Sascha O. Becker & Marco Caliendo, 2007. "Sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(1), pages 71-83, February.
    19. Ramírez-Álvarez, Aurora Alejandra, 2019. "Land titling and its effect on the allocation of public goods: Evidence from Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Korir, Lilian & Rizov, Marian & Ruto, Eric, 2020. "Food security in Kenya: Insights from a household food demand model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 99-108.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Biogas production technology; Agricultural household welfare; Informal credit; Cost-effectiveness; Sustainable development; Propensity score matching;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources
    • Q43 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy and the Macroeconomy
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:181:y:2023:i:c:s0301421523003130. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.