Author
Listed:
- Benjamin L. Robinson
- Sarah Jewitt
- Mike J. Clifford
- Joseph Hewitt
Abstract
This paper applies the market map tool to the Nepalese biomass improved cookstove (ICS) sector highlighting existing weaknesses in government policy and biomass cookstove market chains to provide recommendations to better address the social, economic, and cultural needs of users. This addresses the problem of low adoption rates of biomass ICS in Nepal. Our research objectives set out to explore the effectiveness of market maps designed for East Africa’s ICS sector (Stevens et al. [2019]. “Market Mapping for Improved Cookstoves: Barriers and Opportunities in East Africa.” Development in Practice) in Nepal, co-develop a revised market map for Nepal’s biomass ICS sector, conduct a parallel process for institutional-scale biomass ICS and draw on the co-produced market map to inform policy and regulatory frameworks relating to biomass-fuelled ICS. The methodological approach involved reviewing cookstove-related policy documents and regulatory frameworks, undertaking 31 semi-structured interviews, analysing findings from an Institutional Top-Loading Down-Draft (TLUD) Natural Draft Gasifier Pilot study and co-developing the final market map in collaboration with key ICS stakeholders. The results indicate that although government policy actively promotes biomass ICS, this often results in cookstove “stacking” rather than the sustained and exclusive use of clean cooking solutions necessary to promote health benefits. Attention is also focused on the underdeveloped nature of the institutional cookstove market. Our conclusions highlight the usefulness of market maps with a monitoring and evaluation element for identifying barriers to clean cooking uptake and facilitating product improvement by integrating end-user feedback.
Suggested Citation
Benjamin L. Robinson & Sarah Jewitt & Mike J. Clifford & Joseph Hewitt, 2022.
"Understanding the current market enablers for Nepal’s biomass cookstove industry,"
Development in Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 52-68, January.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:cdipxx:v:32:y:2022:i:1:p:52-68
DOI: 10.1080/09614524.2021.1893659
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:taf:cdipxx:v:32:y:2022:i:1:p:52-68. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cdip .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.