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 c...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/main?menuPK=64187510&pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=523679&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&siteName=WDS&entityID=000158349_20110721161347 http://hdl.handle.net/10986/3495 |
| Summary: | 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. |
|---|