Will Environmental Health and Safety Education and Sensitization Improve Usage of Liquified Petroleum Gas? A lens on the cooking stove distribution model in Ghana.

​

August 26-27, 2025| Accra, Ghana

Isaac Doku | University of Education, Winneba-Ghana / PhD

​

​

• Isaac Doku (PhD), University of Education, Winneba Ghana

​

• Isabelle Cohen (PhD), Assistant Professor, University of Washington, USA

​

• Hamdiyah Alhassan (PhD), Professor, University of Development Studies, Tamale

​

• Mohammed Nuhu Mujtaba, Kintampo Health Research, Kintampo North

​

• Genesis Bhenda Kollie, Lecturer, University of Liberia

TEAM MEMBERS

What we will be discussing:

This study seeks to answer:

​

• Does environmental, health and safety (EHS) sensitization increase take-up of LPG cookstoves?

​

• Does EHS sensitization aimed at females, rather than males, affect take-up rates of LPG cookstoves?

​

• Does EHS sensitization lead to increases in women’s empowerment within households?

​

Plate 1: National LPG Promotion Program

• About 4 billion people globally still use inefficient cooking energy (Berkouwer and Dean, 2022).

​

• Smoke from this inefficient traditional cookstoves causes household air pollution leading to increased risk for disease and death.
• Disproportionate harm to women and girls, who spend more time exposed to HAP.

​

• Ghana faces the challenge of increasing access, adoption, and use of LPG due to:
• Cost of LPG technology
• Widespread lack of knowledge on environmental and health effects of wood fuel usage

MOTIVATION & BACKGROUND

• This paper contributes to the literature on Euler equation puzzle, or the low adoption of seemingly beneficial technologies

(Kremer et al., 2013; Dupas 2014; Atkin et al., 2017; Magruder, 2018; Kremer, Rao, & Schilbach, 2019; Berkouwer & Dean, 2022)

​

• Most prior studies focus on willingness-to-pay for cookstoves in Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda, Bangladesh and Pakistan

(Berkouwer & Dean, 2022; Beltramo et al., 2015; Levine et al., 2018; Barstow et al., 2019; Mobarak et al., 2012; Tarozzi et al., 2014; Jan & Lohano, 2021)

​

• Our novel approach: focusing on households that already have cookstoves
• Our study focuses on whether lack of information represents a barrier to usage even when the technology itself is freely provided.

​

SCIENTIFIC CONTRIBUTION

The Ministry of Energy (MoE) distributed 2,0000 free cookstoves to 2,000 households through the Kwaebibirem Municipal Assembly between January-April 2024.

• MoE provided a list of 797 households given cookstoves.
• Randomly assigned survey ID numbers using STATA

​

🡪 Sample of 785 households: necessary to achieve a minimum detectable effect of 100 minutes in LPG cookstove usage per week

​

​

DESCRIPTION OF INTERVENTION & SAMPLE

PICTURE HERE

DESCRIPTION OF TREATMENT ARMS

• Arm 1: Household Head Received Sensitization
• Proposed sample of 262 | Actual sample of 212

​

• Arm 2: Primary Cook Received Sensitization (Measuring impact of gender)
• Proposed sample of 261 | Actual sample of 219

​

• Control: Only received LPG cookstove – no further sensitization
• Proposed sample of 262 | Actual sample of 222

​

​

​

Is the distribution of LPG cookstoves enough or is sensitization also necessary for meaningful adoption?

What role does gender play with respect to LPG distribution and usage?

​

METHODOLOGY

CAPTION OR PHOTO CREDIT: RIGHT HERE

ANALYSIS: IMPACT OF SENSITIZATION ON LPG STOVE USAGE

METHODOLOGY

CAPTION OR PHOTO CREDIT: RIGHT HERE

METHODOLOGY

​

​

​

ANALYSIS: IMPACT OF SENSITIZING WOMEN ON LPG STOVE USAGE

METHODOLOGY

CAPTION OR PHOTO CREDIT: RIGHT HERE

METHODOLOGY

​

​

​

ANALYSIS: IMPACT OF SENSITIZING WOMEN ON EMPOWERMENT

• EHS sensitization increased LPG usage
• an index measuring various dimensions of LPG usage by roughly 0.3 standard deviations.
• EHS sensitization of the household head and of the primary cook increased LPG cooking time by 22 minutes and 31 minutes per day.
• No significant difference was found on LPG usage between sensitization aimed at female and male household heads.
• EHS sensitization did not have any significant impact on women’s empowerment

KEY RESULTS

Total increase in LPG cook time by 22 minutes (men) and 31 minutes (women) per day

​

• EHS sensitization of the household head increased LPG cooking time by 154.3 minutes/week

​

• EHS sensitization of the primary cook (woman) increase LPG cooking time by 220 minutes/week

​

Impact of EHS Sensitization on LPG Usage-cooking time

Table 5: Impact of Female Decision Maker Sensitization on LPG Usage

• The result shows that the assignment of male vs. female decision makers does not differentially affect LPG usage.
• The impact is not different in a situation where separate household head and primary cook were surveyed or not.

Figure: EHS sensitization on women empowerment

• The findings indicate that EHS sensitization does not significantly influence women’s empowerment and the various dimensions.

​

• MoE should provide EHS sensitization at the household level when distributing the cookstoves in partnership with GNFS.

​

• It does not matter who is sensitized in the household -- it will likely yield the same impact.

​

• Due to the challenges faced in obtaining the list of cookstove recipients, we recommend that MoE should be the sole distributor of the cookstoves to beneficiary households.

​

• The Ministry also recommends similar studies for island communities in Ghana.

POLICY TAKEAWAYS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Let’s keep

in touch.

THANKS FOR LISTENING!

idoku@uew.edu.gh