Madagascar eMBeD Diagnostic

Public Disclosure Authorized
Cleaner Cookstoves,
Greener Lives
BEHAVIORAL DIAGNOSTICS NOTE
MG Ethanol Clean
Cooking Climate Finance
Program
FEBRUARY 2021
P154440
© 2021 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank
1818 H Street NW
Washington DC 20433
Telephone: 202-473-1000
Internet: www.worldbank.org
This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations,
and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of
Executive Directors, or the governments they represent.
The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors,
denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of
The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.
Rights and Permissions
The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of
its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full
attribution to this work is given.
Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The
World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-
mail: [email protected].
Cover photo: Photo: World Bank / Sarah Farhat
The report was prepared by a World Bank team comprised of Samantha De Martino (Economist, EPVGE), Joana
Sousa Lourenço (Behavioral Scientist, EPVGE), Jonathan Coony (Senior Carbon Finance Specialist, SCCFM), and Sarah
Elise Elven (Consultant, EPVGE).
The team would like to thank Marc Sadler (Practice Manager, SCCFM), Pierella Paci (Practice Manager, EAEPV),
Andrew Dabalen (Practice Manager, ESAPV), Matthew David King (Environmental Specialist, SCCFM), Yabei Zhang
(Senior Energy Specialist, IEEES), Dana Rysankova (Senior Energy Specialist, IEEGK), Nuyi Tao (Senior Carbon Finance
Specialist, SCCFM), Xiaoyu Chang (Carbon Finance Analyst, SCCFM), and the Project's Technical Advisory Committee
composed by Michael A. Toman (Research Manager, DECSI), Julie Ipe (Clean Cooking Alliance), Leidy Klotz
(University of Virginia), and Martine Visser (University of Cape Town). Further thanks are owed to Abigail Dalton
(Operations Officer, EPVGE), Karem Edwards (Program Assistant, EPVGE), Jimena Llopis Abella (Consultant, EPGVE),
Diksha Bijlani (Consultant, EPVGE), Benn Finlay Hogan (Consultant, World Bank), and Jessie Rianah Andriamasinoro
(Green Development). Photos are courtesy of A'Melody Lee and Simone D. McCourtie.
The present research, including qualitative data collection, was carried out with financial support from the Carbon
Initiative for Development (Ci-Dev) and the Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP).
MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 1

Contents
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................... 3
II. CONTEXT ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................... 8
A. PROGRAM OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 8
B. MADAGASCAR OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................ 10
C. MADAGASCAR ENERGY USE .......................................................................................................... 11
D. PROJECT OVERVIEW: CI-DEV MADAGASCAR ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING PROGRAM ................. 11
III. METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................... 14
IV. THE USER JOURNEY ..................................................................................................................... 16
V. BARRIERS TO COOKSTOVE ADOPTION ........................................................................................ 17
A. ECONOMIC BARRIERS TO ADOPTION ............................................................................................ 18
E. BEHAVIORAL BARRIERS TO ADOPTION ......................................................................................... 20
VI. POTENTIAL INTERVENTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION .................................................................... 28
VII. A CALL TO ACTION: NEXT STEPS................................................................................................... 38
VIII. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 39
IX. ANNEXES ..................................................................................................................................... 43

PROBLEM DEFINITION:
Households in Madagascar continue to

rely on woody biomass despite the
availability of ethanol stoves in the
market which are subsidized and clean
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY for cooking. Multiple behavioral barriers
contribute to low rates of uptake of
ethanol stoves and stove stacking in
95% of households in Madagascar rely on wood and Madagascar.
charcoal for cooking. Dependence on woody biomass
for cooking leads to high levels of household air
pollution, resulting in high rates of Acute Lower
Respiratory Infections (ALRI), which is the cause of
12,000 total deaths per year in Madagascar, of which
10,000 are children under five years, making up 20% of
the cause of death in children under five years (World Bank, 2011). Moreover, dependence on biomass
for household energy - a principal cause of deforestation - poses an environment crisis; with 80% of its
natural forested areas lost, and with an annual national consumption of about 18 million cubic meters
total for firewood (9 cbm) and wood as charcoal for cooking (8.6 cbm), recent studies indicate that if the
rate of forest reduction remains due to fuelwood for household energy and other factors such as land
clearance for agriculture, Madagascar’s forests will be lost within 40 years (World Bank, 2011). To
reduce the use of firewood and charcoal and promote clean cooking, the government has developed a
legal framework for the promotion of ethanol as a household cooking fuel.
The Ci-Dev Madagascar Ethanol Clean Cooking Program promotes market-based adoption of ethanol
as a clean-cooking fuel by households. The program was launched in 2016 and targeted dissemination
of 100,000-130,000 ethanol stoves using carbon finance to subsidize stove price. Yet, as of June 2019,
only 7,600 ethanol stoves had been sold in Madagascar (Green Development, 2019). This low uptake has
been due to various structural and behavioral barriers facing both households and ethanol suppliers.
The present diagnostic examines the behavioral barriers to uptake and sustained use of ethanol
cookstoves in Madagascar. The target beneficiaries are households in rural, peri-urban, and urban areas
which rely on wood or charcoal for cooking despite the availability of subsidized ethanol stoves in the
market. The other target beneficiaries are households who have purchased an ethanol cookstove but
continue to use their traditional stove. The interventions proposed as part of this diagnostic may be
implemented as part of the Ci-Dev program in Madagascar.

Evidence for this diagnostic note is based on qualitative research carried out in the field, a desk
review, and preliminary data from the World Bank’s Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) Survey in Madagascar,
collected from 4172 households in 2020. Research revealed multiple barriers that impede uptake and
sustained use of ethanol cookstoves:
Barriers to interest and knowledge of product: Both households who own an ethanol
stove and those who do not tend to exhibit low valuation of the benefits of the improved
cookstoves. Specifically, households tend to undervalue more intangible, long run
benefits of stoves, such as positive impacts on respiratory health. Furthermore, there is a
lack of knowledge about lifestyle benefits of ethanol stoves amongst households,
especially benefits that households value most highly, such as convenience, more time to
spend with family in the evenings and mornings due to time efficiency, and ability to cook
safely inside in wet weather.
Barriers related to purchase of product: Improved ethanol cookstoves are viewed as a

luxury good and as such, low-income households face challenges to save in the present
for a lumpy payment and have a low willingness to pay given competing demands for the
disposable income available. Households have access to microfinance, yet, they are risk-
averse; in our interviews, households were unwilling to take out a microloan for a
technology that is not for productive use. Present-biased households – those that are
focused on the current barriers, rather than potential future advantages – who are fully
informed that stove benefits exceed costs in the long run, may still never switch due to
difficulty putting money away for the future. Further, price distortions resulting from the
price subsidies lead to lower willingness to pay. For example, the First Lady’s promotion
of ethanol stoves used a one-day time-limited offer to encourage stove purchase. Though
this greatly encouraged purchase at the low price, some households are now de-facto
anchored at the price of 12,000 AR ($3.30) for a stove and unwilling to pay the (still
largely subsidized) price of 40,000 AR ($11). Elsewhere in the country, the stove is sold for
70,000 AR ($20) – which is already subsidized from 350,000 AR ($100).
Barriers to sustained use: Social norms around cooking are largely the basis for stove-
stacking. Cooking norms feed the perception that cooking on ethanol stoves is a high-skill
activity and only suitable for fast-cooking. As a result, many households still use charcoal
stoves for slow cooking (dry beans, beef, pork feet, etc.) and are reluctant to let the
domestic worker use the ethanol stove due to negativity bias.

Furthermore, there are structural and economic barriers to adoption; due to limited supply of ethanol in
Madagascar, the fuel is imported leading to high costs of cooking (40-50% higher than charcoal). While
the Ci-Dev project seeks to address fuel supply by supporting the development of ethanol micro
distilleries (EMDs), progress towards this goal has not yet been realized, and Madagascar is largely
reliant on imported ethanol to fulfill current domestic demand.

POTENTIAL
INTERVENTIONS:
Several potential interventions have been identified to target the behavioral barriers above and
increase uptake and/or sustained use of ethanol cookstoves. Selected examples are outlined next,
while full details can be found in the diagnostic note:
• TARGETING BARRIERS TO INTEREST AND KNOWLEDGE OF PRODUCT: Branding the stoves with a
catchy, memorable name that encapsulates their most valued attribute, and running an
awareness campaign that reaches household decisionmakers to emphasize the most-valued
stove attributes. The campaign could harness different messengers, such as role models and
community leaders. The First Lady, for example, has served as a role model for many
households that have so far shifted to ethanol stoves in Madagascar.
• TARGETING BARRIERS TO PURCHASE OF PRODUCT: Encouraging small savings, accruing

persistently over time, towards an ethanol stove through soft commitment devices, such as a
savings container. A savings calendar with inspirational messages from role models (e.g., First
Lady) can be given to households as a savings goal-monitor for their progress. Households can
be shown videos in groups about similar people in nearby communities who managed to save
for a stove and the stove’s benefits to increase aspirations (Bernard et al, 2014); these events
can be leveraged to encourage sign up or public commitments to save towards an ethanol
stove. Time-limited discounts can be used as price incentives to encourage present-biased
households while still having realistic prices. Where possible, these discounts should be offered
in tandem with the First Lady’s campaign to “re-anchor” households from the same source that
initially set the artificially low price anchor (refer to Barriers to Adoption, Price Anchoring).
• TARGETING BARRIERS TO SUSTAINED USE: Socializing stove information diffusion through

demonstrations, role models, and social networks, to help create awareness and shift cultural
norms around cooking. Communal cooking events can be organized by local churches on a
monthly basis, where community members can sign up (as individuals or in groups) to cook
with ethanol cookstoves. Incentives such as small rewards can be offered for the dish that gets
the most votes, and information on stove price and purchase options can be communicated at
these events. Domestic workers can be encouraged to participate; observing a “peer”
performing the target behavior may empower domestic workers to learn through the training
and make use of the acquired knowledge. Households can also be allowed to take stoves home
so that they can gain more in-depth personal experience as well as confidence in cooking with
them. Separately, cooking norms can be adapted to decrease stove stacking and increase the

daily use of the ethanol cookstove; specifically, by targeting household habits to encourage
bean soaking at night to reduce cooking time the next day could increase the use of the ethanol
stove for staple food items.

II. CONTEXT ANALYSIS
A. PROGRAM OVERVIEW
In 2019, the World Bank launched an initiative to apply principles from behavioral economics to clean
energy access for increased uptake of off-grid photovoltaic Solar Home Systems (SHS) and Improved
Cookstoves (ICS). Universal electricity access and transitions to low carbon energy technologies are still
a long way off. Electricity access in Sub-Saharan Africa is only 43% and the International Energy Agency
projects that under current conditions, more than 700 million people, predominantly in rural
settlements in sub-Saharan Africa, will remain without electricity in 2040 (IEA, 2018; World Bank and
IEA, 2017). Similarly, according to the World Health Organization, access to clean cooking in South-
Saharan Africa stood at only 14% in 2016 (WHO, 2016).
Most efforts to increase uptake of SHS and ICS have focused on financial incentives and improved
technologies. Development partners and banks, governments and other stakeholders have been
successful both in improving the underlying technologies and decreasing the retail prices charged to
consumers. This has had substantial positive impacts on deployment of both SHS and ICS although the
pace of change is insufficient to meet development goals in a timely manner.
The present initiative will complement the more established methods of supporting clean energy access
by generating and piloting behavioral interventions that increase uptake and sustained use of SHS and
ICS. Decisions by households are not solely driven by financial and technical factors but are also affected
by underlying biases, norms and mental models, many of which work against selection of SHS and ICS.
Examining this problem through the lens of behavioral economics will bring greater understanding of
these barriers and how to minimize or overcome them.
The behavioral approach is both individualistic and impactful across communities, changing societal
norms to increase uptake and use and can be applied in combination with incentives to achieve more
sustainable resource use. Meeting sustainability targets therefore requires developing policy tools that
are informed by a rich understanding of how individuals within society respond to incentives, and
consequently change their behavior to develop a sustainable norm of using clean energy technologies.
The expected outcome of the initiative is the development and integration of innovative, cost-effective,
and scalable behavioral solutions to projects for increasing low carbon energy access. The lessons
learned and the portfolio of proposed interventions for integrating behavioral science into low-carbon
energy access projects will result in solutions that are transferable to projects beyond this initiative to,
ultimately, increase uptake and sustained use of low-carbon energy access technologies.

THE PROJECT IS DESIGNED WITH TWO SEQUENTIAL PHASES
Phase 1 – Diagnostics. The first component analyzes conditions in six selected low-carbon energy access
projects to identify existing bottlenecks and design (at the project and global levels) behavioral
interventions to increase uptake and/or sustained use of target technologies. The focus was on ICS or
clean cookstoves in Madagascar, Ghana, and Rwanda and SHS in Ethiopia, Senegal, and Uganda.
Specifically, the six countries and energy access projects selected for Phase 1 Diagnostics are:
(a) Ethiopia: Ethiopia Off-Grid Renewable Energy Program
(b) Ghana: Ghana Energy Sector Transformation Initiative Project
(c) Madagascar: Madagascar ethanol clean cooking climate finance program
(d) Rwanda: Rwanda Improved Cookstoves Project (Inyenyeri)
(e) Senegal: Senegal Rural Electrification Program
(f) Uganda: Energy Access Scale-up Project (EASP) (EEX)
Phase 2 - Piloting Interventions. The second component will test the behavioral interventions designed
in Phase 1 in three countries, evaluate their impact, and create and disseminate a practitioner toolkit
that offers models for introducing behavior change into energy access projects.
The project team has completed Phase 1 Diagnostics of the six target countries. For each country, a
Diagnostic Note has been produced which explains context and challenges in the country, the
methodology, the primary barriers to adoption of SHS or ICS and potential behavioral interventions to
mitigate those barriers. The team will now shift to Phase 2 to pilot the interventions designed in Phase
1.
THE PROJECT REPRESENTS A COLLABORATION BETWEEN THREE

UNITS WITHIN THE WORLD BANK
The Carbon Initiative for Development (Ci-Dev), a trust fund that mobilizes private finance for clean
energy access in low-income countries through results-based finance for emission reduction projects.
The Mind, Behavior, and Development Unit (eMBeD), the World Bank’s behavioral science team,
housed within the Poverty & Equity Global Practice, which works with governments, and other partners
to diagnose, design, and evaluate behaviorally informed interventions.
The Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP), a partnership between the World Bank
and development partners that helps low- and middle-income countries reduce poverty and boost
growth through sustainable energy solutions.
More information on these units is found in Annex A.

FIGURE 1:
Madagascar: Geographic Location
B. MADAGASCAR OVERVIEW
Madagascar is an island state in southern Africa with a population of 25.5 million (as of 2017). Despite
being rich in natural resources, it is one of the poorest countries in the world, with 75 percent of the
population living on less than $1.90 per day. Madagascar has the world’s fourth highest rate of chronic
malnutrition, with 50 percent of children under five suffering from stunting. The rate of access to
electricity is just 13 percent, one of the lowest in the world, and the country is one of the hardest hit by
extreme weather events in Africa, with an average of three cyclones per year. Agriculture is the
country’s leading employer and the livelihood of 80% of the population. However, agricultural growth
has been low and volatile in recent years, generally trending at less than demographic growth (World
Bank, 2019).
Economic growth in Madagascar was estimated at 5.1 percent in 2018, similar as in previous five years.
However, these positive economic results have had little impact on the poverty rate, which decreased
slightly from 77.7 percent in 2014 to 74.1 percent in 2019. Furthermore, the adverse economic, social,
and fiscal impact of the COVID-19 crisis are expected to be very substantial, including a sharp
deceleration in economic activity in 2020, with gross domestic product (GDP) growth predicted to slow
to 1.2 percent (World Bank, 2020).

Presidential elections were held peacefully in January 2019, marking the first political transfer of power
in Madagascar (World Bank, 2019). President Rajoelina won the elections with 55.6% of the vote and an
election manifesto promising to scale up growth and radically reduce poverty.
C. MADAGASCAR ENERGY USE
Around 95% of Malagasy households depend on woody biomass, primarily wood and charcoal, for
household energy. Electricity, natural gas, and kerosene provide cooking fuel for only a small
minority, with liquified petroleum gas accounting for 11% in urban areas while being negligible
elsewhere. Indeed, the majority of households in urban areas (85%) currently rely on charcoal for
cooking, while wood is burnt by the majority in rural areas (72%), with much of this collected from the
local environment (World Bank, 2020). The use of woody biomass as the dominant household energy
source in Madagascar has been imposing significant threats to forests, and the use of charcoal and wood
fuel for cooking also contributes to a high incidence of acute respiratory infections due to household air
pollution. Nearly 12,000 deaths per year are attributed to such infections, of which 10,000 deaths are
children under five (World Bank, 2011).
To reduce the use of firewood and charcoal and promote clean cooking, the government has developed
a legal framework for the promotion of ethanol as a household cooking fuel. Following the
recommendation of a World-Bank-funded feasibility study in 2011, the government set forth a decree in
July 2014 to promote ethanol cooking through several measures, including:
(a) an exemption from heavy alcohol tax for ethanol fuel production and an exemption of import
tax on imported ethanol stoves;
(b) setting performance and quality standards for ethanol fuel; and
(c) designating the Ministry of Industry to be technically responsible for approving Ethanol Micro
Distilleries (EMDs) and promoting ethanol clean cooking (World Bank, 2016b).
D. PROJECT OVERVIEW: CI-DEV MADAGASCAR

ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING PROGRAM
The Development Objective of the Ci-Dev Madagascar Ethanol Clean Cooking Program (henceforth,
the “Program”) is to reduce GHG emissions from the use of woody biomass by promoting market-
based adoption of ethanol as a clean cooking solution in Madagascar. The Program expects to reduce
pressure on deforestation, improve rural livelihoods, and reduce household exposure to indoor air
pollution. Green Development (GD), a Norwegian company acting as the Coordinating and Managing
Entity, implements this Program in partnership with Local Implementation Partners (LIPs).

On the demand side, the Program aims to support the dissemination of 100,000-130,000 ethanol stoves,
mainly in urban and peri-urban areas, by using carbon finance to subsidize stove price. The idea is for
LIPs to sell qualified ethanol stoves in a competitive environment to Malagasy households, with stove
subsidies accompanied by an awareness campaign (Green Development, 2019).
To address the affordability of ethanol cookstoves for the implementing partners, the Program provides
a carbon incentive to the LIPs responsible for distributing the ethanol cookstoves through their local
networks. LIPs will receive a carbon incentive per qualified stove sold annually over a period of five
years. For the first five years after ERPA signing, the level of this incentive is US $20 per year for double-
burner stoves and US $12 for single burners. After this period, the carbon incentive will be reduced by
50 percent, to reflect the gradually reduced risk after early movers prove the success of this business
model (Green Development, 2019).
Data from GD suggests that just 7,600 stoves had been sold by June 2019, with 30% of these being in
the capital, Antananarivo. Progress was frustrated by the closure of the initial sole LIP, SAFI
International, which distributed the stove from 2016-2017 until the death of the firm’s owner. A new
LIP, Renew Life, based in Antsirabe, commenced sales in March 2019. Renew Life has established four
kiosks in Antananarivo since October 2019, and in two months one of their kiosks sold around 20 stoves.
[1]
FIGURE 2:
Timeline of ethanol clean cooking development and geographical locations of stove sales by June 2019
(Image Source: Green Development).
1. Data courtesy of Green Development.

On the supply side, at the initial market introduction stage, ethanol will be sourced primarily from the
sugar factories in Madagascar, supplemented by ethanol produced from an existing EMD. Meanwhile,
the Program will pilot two EMDs in cooperation with local partners to test different technologies and
feedstock. As the Program enters its rapid expansion stage, it will support the set up and operation of 63
new EMDs for a sustainable and affordable supply of ethanol from within Madagascar (currently most
ethanol is imported). The Program will support with distillery design, the bulk order of distillery
equipment, and by providing training and technical services to distillery operations.
A NOTE ON
COVID-19 AND INDOOR AIR POLLUTION
The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a significant toll on public health, with 1.27 million deaths around the
world as of November 2020, and 45,647 of these in Africa (African Union, 2020). WHO reports 3.8
million people die every year from household air pollution caused by the inefficient use of solid fuels
and kerosene. These deaths are a result of decreased pulmonary, cardiovascular, and nervous system
functions and impact on one’s immune functions (WHO, 2018).
One of the most significant mechanisms through which ICS reduce indoor air pollution is through
reduction of PM2.5 levels. Penisse et al (2009) studied impact on indoor PM2.5 concentrations of an
ethanol cookstove in Ethiopia after households shifted and found decreases in households' PM2.5
concentrations. On average, a decrease of 84% in PM2.5 concentrations from 1250 μg/m3 to 200 μg/m3
was observed. A meta-analysis of 42 studies evaluating impact of clean cookstoves on PM2.5
concentrations found similar reduction levels for ethanol stoves (83%; Pope et al, 2017).
Recent research has been finding significantly positive associations between PM2.5 concentrations and
confirmed COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths (Wu et al, 2020; Cole et al, 2020; Zhu et al,
2020). This implies that uptake of clean technology in countries largely reliant on solid fuels and
kerosene to meet their energy and cooking needs has large spillover effects on reduced incidence of and
mortality from COVID-19, through reduction of household air pollution.

III. METHODOLOGY
The findings presented in this note are based on a mixed methods approach. Evidence is based mainly
on qualitative research – a desk review followed by qualitative fieldwork –, but this was complemented
with insights from preliminary data from the World Bank’s Multi-Tier Framework (MTF) Survey,
collected from 4172 households in Madagascar in 2020. This survey allowed the team to carry out some
preliminary quantitative analysis in reference to current stove and fuel usage, financial activity, and
household time use. The MTF survey in Madagascar was undertaken with the financial and technical
support of the Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP). 2 Furthermore, an initial
literature review covered the application of behavioral insights to boost the adoption of energy efficient
technologies. The focus of the review was not only on prior behavioral work on cookstoves, but also
behavioral science literature from a variety of sectors, such as health, agriculture and energy. This
review informed the design of the instruments used for the fieldwork, aimed at understanding the
decision-making processes of households, as well as attitudes and perceptions towards adoption or
sustained use of cookstoves.
Fieldwork Protocol November 2019
During November 2019 the team carried out qualitative field research with households, farmers, and
other relevant market actors. Semi-Structured Interviews (SSIs), Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), and in-
field observations were conducted. Though the desk review initially carried out had led to an initial
focus on the supply side of ethanol and possible behavioral bottlenecks limiting Malagasy farmers’
ability to increase sugarcane yields, the team had to refocus the diagnostic as a result of insights
collected during fieldwork.
Specifically, the pivot came from a focus group with farmers, who explained that they currently have no
incentive to increase yields due to a monopolistic market for sugar. In 2008, a Chinese-owned company
bought the state-owned sugar mill and put in place a quota system for sugarcane purchases from
farmers. For this reason, until there is more than one buyer for sugarcane in the market, farmers have
no incentive to increase their yield. However, the farmers in the focus group were eager to have
support to build micro distilleries for ethanol production.
Given the existing structural constraints to increasing the supply of ethanol, the behavioral diagnostics
shifted to consider bottlenecks on the demand side. Fieldwork activities were adjusted in order to
encompass households with and without ethanol stoves, and across several different locations.
Specifically, selected areas included rural, peri-urban, and urban areas to understand community norms,
a range of socio-economic statuses under the median income level, and households both with and
without ethanol cookstoves; given time and logistical constraints, the team remained in the region of
2 The final MTF data and report will be published on https://energydata.info/

the sugarcane farmers, and identified surrounding communities in the rural area where GD had sold
ethanol cookstoves in recent months. To speak with households who did not purchase a cookstove, the
team approached households in the community neighboring the households with ethanol cookstoves
with their permission. The team mapped a peri-urban area surrounding a large marketplace, applying
the same strategy. Finally, the team interviewed a household when they approached Antananarivo at
the end of the fieldwork. With more time, the team would have conducted more interviews in
Antananarivo. Subsequent desk research on clean cooking in Madagascar was carried out to
compensate for sample limitations. An overview of the sample is provided next.
HOUSEHOLDS (9 SSI)
• Rural/peri-urban area (Matiakoho, Matsaborilaidama, and Anoronala):

SSI with 4 households with ethanol stoves & 4 with charcoal stoves;
• Peri-urban/urban area (Antananarivo): SSI with 1 household with
ethanol stove;
FARMERS:
• 1 FGDs with 10 sugarcane farmers in the

Ambilobe region.
OBSERVATIONS
• Sugarcane fields in the Ambilobe region.

• 2 Ethanol fuel and stove distribution kiosk
(1 in Ambilobe and 1 in Antananarivo).

IV. THE USER JOURNEY
In the process of deciding to purchase a clean cookstove, a household undergoes several decisions and
actions, as illustrated in Figure 3.
A user must first learn about the availability of ethanol cookstoves and start to recognize the stove’s
utility in their context, such that they become interested in purchasing one. These decision steps are
then followed by a series of actions, including finding out how to obtain a cookstove, gathering the
money to purchase the stove, and travelling to purchase the stove from a distributor. This represents
just one phase of a broader user journey which also encompasses the sustained use of the cookstove as
an alternative to a current biomass cooking solution.
FIGURE 3:
User Journey to Cookstove Purchase

V. BARRIERS TO
COOKSTOVE ADOPTION
Drawing from our desk review and subsequent fieldwork, we detail below the
possible economic and behavioral barriers affecting cookstove adoption in
Madagascar.

A. ECONOMIC BARRIERS TO ADOPTION
Ethanol supply
There are concerns that the supply of ethanol could present a barrier to broader uptake of ethanol
cookstoves. Studies of ethanol stove use in Maputo, Mozambique and Addis Ababa, Ethiopia have found
an unreliable supply of ethanol to be a key barrier to the uptake of ethanol stoves in those contexts
(Mudombi et al, 2018; Benka-Coker et al, 2018). The Ci-Dev project seeks to address fuel supply by
developing ethanol micro distilleries (EMDs) with farmers and progress towards is expected to be
realized in 2021. Until then, Madagascar is still largely reliant on imported ethanol to fulfil current
domestic demand. The ability to import ethanol in sufficiently large quantities may therefore present a
practical barrier to continued expansion of the ethanol cookstove market in Madagascar, absent
progression of the domestic industry. A 2010 report on the feasibility of ethanol as a domestic fuel in
Madagascar warned that supply and price fluctuations must be carefully controlled so as not to ‘destroy
the burgeoning market for stoves’ (World Bank, 2011, p. 15).
Supply constraints have implications in terms of behavioral barriers to adoption, such as potential hassle
in acquiring the fuel, the interview conducted in the urban area cited certain times when the supply of
ethanol was not available. In contrast, the convenience of charcoal consistently accessible from vendors
at each of the local, smaller markets should not be discounted. Once viable, the local ethanol suppliers
should target similar and as commonly found distribution points as charcoal to be competitive in its
accessibility.
Higher cooking cost

Until ethanol can be domestically produced, the price of imported ethanol will suffer volatile price
fluctuations due to supply issues, high import duties and VAT. The initial economic analysis of the
Program found cooking with ethanol could result in a 40-50% increase in cooking cost, as compared to
charcoal (World Bank PAD, 2016c). However, the price of charcoal fluctuates widely, especially in urban
areas where its use is most common, increasing by up to 60% during the rainy season. Using these
assumptions, a USAID study (2020) estimates that the annual cost of ethanol use could match the
annual charcoal purchase with a reduction of $0.19/L in urban centers in the coming years. This would
require ethanol to be priced at $0.52/L.
Rural low-income households shifting from traditional three-stone fire stoves have a higher cost burden
to switch from a fuel which requires collecting to ethanol. According to a recent World Bank household
energy survey data from 2019, over 74% of households in rural areas use only collected wood fuel for
cooking. Conversely, in urban areas, almost 65% of households use only charcoal for their cooking
needs. Accordingly, this highlights the need for different approaches for targeting; for instance, women
and children often bear the cost in terms of time spent and safety concerns when collecting firewood.
Messages which highlight time savings, translating into more time spent with family, socializing within

the community, studying for school, and pursuing economic endeavors would resonate with the rural
communities.
However, this has implications for the household’s relative current expenditure on fuel, and
expectations for take-up should differ. Realistically, the cost of ethanol fuel may not be sustainably
affordable for the lowest income households in the rural areas until it can be domestically produced.
Until then, the most achievable extensive margin are those households switching expenditure from
charcoal fuel to ethanol fuel in the urban areas. As well as the cost of the fuel itself, the purchase of an
ethanol stove also represents a significant investment for households. The non-subsidized price of this
technology is currently 13 times that of a charcoal stove ($35 for an ethanol stove at full prices), making
it inaccessible without discounts to 98% of Malagasy households. However, a combination of subsidies,
VAT reductions, and support with payment plans or savings could make the stoves accessible to a great
many more households (50% of urban households) (USAID, 2020).
Evidence from Maputo, Mozambique suggests that demand exists for ethanol cookstoves despite the
greater cooking cost relating to uptake (Mudombi et al, 2018). Other important, non-quantifiable
benefits may be the reason for this: ethanol stoves offer improvements in health, cleanliness,
convenience and time savings, as well as the ability to cook in wet weather, all of which may be valued
by the individual household. Indeed, our fieldwork revealed that the ability to cook in wet weather was
valued in particular. However, until ethanol is competitive with fuels such as charcoal, adoption will be
limited to higher income households (Mudombi et al, 2018). Please note that using ethanol is cheaper
than cooking with LPG, though still marginally more expensive than using charcoal.

B. BEHAVIORAL BARRIERS TO ADOPTION
This section considers how contextual factors may interact with psychological (social and cognitive)
factors to shape the behaviors of interest. The barriers discussed in this section represent preliminary
working hypotheses, which have been identified by matching relevant behavioral science literature to
the contextual information derived from initial fieldwork and secondary data.
1. BARRIERS TO INTEREST AND KNOWLEDGE OF PRODUCT
Low Valuation of Stove Benefits
B E H AV I OR B OT T LE NE C K S
Desire to own ethanol cookstove due to Lack of knowledge of benefits and low
knowing about and valuing the benefits it dissemination of benefits from retailers and
offers. satisfied users to non-users. Low valuation of
intangible, long run benefits of clean
cookstoves, such as those on respiratory health.
Households’ willingness to transition to ethanol cookstoves is driven by their positive and negative
perception of the status quo (here, wood and charcoal cookstoves), as well as their perceptions of the
alternatives available to them.
Salience of environmental, but not health, benefits. Health benefits of stoves were not considered
especially important in the interviews conducted, with households showing lack of concern or
internalized costs of health risks associated with charcoal. Specifically, interviewees described more
salient understandings of the impact of cooking with charcoal indoors – the soot on the ceiling, seeing
black come out of a cough. However, interviewees would nod their head in disagreement that this was a
health concern. A study focusing on ethanol as a household fuel in Madagascar also found that users of

charcoal cookstoves valued charcoal’s convenience but reported that it was ‘too smoky’ (World Bank,
2011).
The study found regional variations in awareness about the negative health effects of charcoal
cookstoves (43.9% respondents in Ambositra were aware, versus only 8.3% in Vatomandry). Only 2.8%
of all current charcoal users were happy with their fuel choice; however, all wood users wanted to
change, many to charcoal.
In contrast, low-income rural households displayed much more concern for the environment and the
benefit of ethanol stoves for improving climate change and ‘the trees’ – likely the result of a campaign
of ethanol cookstove promotion spearheaded by the country’s First Lady in which environmental
benefits were emphasized (see details below).
In terms of stove functionality, households – whether rural or urban – that rely on cooking with
firewood or charcoal which adopted an ethanol stove, were most impressed with the stove’s portability
to move indoors during rainy season, often commenting that they invite their neighbors with charcoal
stoves over for dinner, as well as the stove’s fast-cooking ability. The interviews each detailed the ease
of boiling water for tea, and for reheating food, which allowed them more time to spend with family at
night and in the mornings.
Given the positive response from ethanol stove users and the high valuation of many of the attributes
these stoves offer by non-users, there appears to be room for informational campaigns about ethanol
cookstoves that emphasize the traits household value most highly, such as environmental and time-
saving benefits, and the ease of cooking in the rain. However, such interventions may need to be
coupled with cost interventions, since this was also a key concern for households.

2. BARRIERS RELATED TO PURCHASE OF PRODUCT
Challenges to Saving
B OT T LE NE C K S
Save for lumpy payment of Saving up for cookstoves is challenging for budget
ethanol cookstove. Lack of knowledge
constrained households.ofThese
these households
benefits and
lowafford
cannot dissemination of benefits
to buy a clean fromwithout
cookstove retailers
and
saving orsatisfied users
taking out to non-users. Low
a loan.
valuation of intangible, long run benefits of
While microfinance
stoves, loans are
such as those available, many
on respiratory health.
households are risk averse to taking out interest-
paying loans for household appliances, as the
technology does not generate financial returns.
Most households cannot afford to buy a cookstove without saving or taking out a loan. Technology
adoption often implies an upfront lumpy cost, with gains that are spread into the future. Indeed, even
with carbon subsidies in place, ethanol stoves represent a significant expense for most households in
Madagascar. A World Bank study from 2014 estimated household expenditure at around 2.46 million AR
per year (2020 values), with just under half of this allocated to non-food expenditures (around 1.11
million AR in 2020 values, or 92,000 AR per month). Provided these amounts are still indicative of
household expenditure, stove purchases would represent around 75 percent of all monthly non-food
expenditure at the carbon credit subsidized price of 70,000 AR (approx. $20). For the capital city, a 2016
survey (World Bank, 2016) measured yearly non-food expenditure to be around 3.8 million AR in
Antananarivo on average (2020 values), with a median of 2 million AR (2020 values). In the city, a
cookstove would therefore amount to around 30 percent of average household monthly non-food
expenditure, or 57 percent of median household non-food expenditure.

There may be underinvestment due to present bias and risk-aversion to taking out interest-paying
loans for appliances. Since the average daily income of many Malagasy households is not large enough
to easily purchase an ethanol cookstove without borrowing or saving, careful attention is needed to
understand how and if stoves can be afforded. Further, even if the price itself is affordable in the long
run, poor areas often lack access to formal credit and to commitment savings products which would
allow them to purchase the stove (Ashraf et al 2006; Dupas & Robinson, 2013). Present biased or naïve
individuals who are fully informed that the benefits to such a technology exceed such costs in the long
run, may still never switch for this reason. Even where credit is available, it may not be advisable for
investments in household appliances, since these do not generate profits that could cover interest
payments. Indeed, households are hesitant to use microcredit loans to purchase cookstoves in
Madagascar, where loans are viewed as risky, business-only activities.
Saving up for cookstoves is challenging for budget constrained households. Whether due to present
bias or merely to a lack of formal financial services, it can be difficult for individuals to put money away
for the future. Savings mechanisms and commitment devices may therefore be necessary to mitigate
problems of under-saving or self-control in the face of the multiple competing demands on household
income (Karlan et al., 2014). The Madagascar MTF survey (World Bank, 2020) found that payment in
installments was uncommon, with 93% of stove owners having paid upfront and in full for their current
stove. Moreover, saving with formal and informal institutions was rare amongst surveyed households,
with 75% of households uninvolved in formal savings behavior and 86% uninvolved in informal savings
mechanisms.
A USAID study (2020) into the market for ethanol stoves in Madagascar concludes that ethanol stoves
would be affordable to 50% of urban Malagasy households if price reductions were accompanied by
payment plans allowing households to pay for the technology in installments. An alternative to such a
payment schedule is to bolster savings behavior amongst such households.

Price Anchoring
Willingness to buy subsidized cookstoves at The First Lady’s campaign previously offered a
country-wide price one-day promotional price of $3, which
of $20. anchored households to the lower price and
made the country-wide subsidized price of $20
seem high.
The existing literature examining the willingness to pay for preventative healthcare products has found
this to be consistently low across many different items and contexts (JPAL, 2018; Kremer and Miguel,
2007; Kremer et al, 2011). As mentioned above, our exploratory fieldwork aligns with these findings as
we found that households were dismissive of the health benefits offered by ethanol cookstoves. Since
this low valuation of health effects can lead to an under-adoption of an improved technology for a given
price, there are strong arguments to be made for significant subsidies when introducing such products
to the market, given their positive externalities. Subsidies and free distribution have increased the usage
of many different products that benefit user health (JPAL, 2018; Kremer and Miguel, 2007; Kremer et al,
2011; Ashraf et al, 2010; Cohen and Dupas, 2010).
However, though subsidies may be effective in the immediate term, there is some danger that they
can damage product markets once prices return to the market rate. Indeed, promotion of ethanol
stoves may have suffered this problem in Madagascar. The First Lady of Madagascar has been
promoting ethanol stoves through her Fitia foundation, visiting areas to speak about the environmental
benefits of the stoves and offering these at a significant discount. While she has served as an excellent
role model in this respect, the First Lady’s intervention seems to have created some price distortions,
anchoring households in the areas she visited to the discounted price being offered. Country-wide, the
price of the ethanol stove is subsidized at 70,000 AR (approx. $20) for a double-burner and 40,000 AR
(approx. $12) for a single-burner stove. In areas where the First Lady is promoting the stoves, she is
further subsidizing the price with an increased discount on the first day of sales to 12,000 AR (approx.
$3). Households we interviewed that still use only a charcoal stove expressed a willingness to pay 12,000
AR for an ethanol stove (the price many of their neighbors paid) but are unwilling to pay the current

price of 40,000 AR for these items. They were still anchored on the First Lady’s initial price when we
informed them the price is almost four-fold outside of their region.
TABLE 1:
Stove prices through Ci-Dev and First Lady’s Campaign
SUBSIDIZED STOVE PRICE THROUGH CI-DEV FIRST LADY’S CAMPAIGN

STOVE PRICE
Single-burner Double-burner General First day of sales
$12 $20 $11 $3
These findings offer a contrast to the work of Bensch and Peters (2019) in Senegal, where introductory
offers did not reduce demand amongst non-users in the long term (6 years). More work is needed to
understand how best to incentivize initial cookstove purchase, while creating a sustainable market for
ethanol cookstoves in Madagascar. This work in Madagascar is well placed to contribute to this
question.

3. BARRIERS TO SUSTAINED USE OF PRODUCT
Cooking Norms
Using ethanol cookstove for most cooking Households perceive ethanol stoves as complex to
purposes. use and as unsuitable for domestic workers.
Households also perceive that ethanol cooks

quickly; thus, many perceive charcoal stoves to be
superior for cooking staple food items such as
cassava, rice, and beans, which require slow
cooking.
Where a new technology implies a change in the status quo, such as operational practices or product
experience, this can discourage adoption when this status quo is tied up with social norms. For
example, if households feel that their social status is in some way linked to a certain traditional cooking
practice, altering this might incur reputational costs. There is suggestive evidence that social norms
barriers are binding for the adoption of energy efficient technologies in parts of the developing world.
Indeed, the prevalence of stove stacking (i.e., the practice of using multiple stoves or fuels), which is
very common in areas with a supply of energy efficient products, suggests that norm or habit factors
make completely switching stoves difficult (Akpalu et al, 2011). In the USAID study (2020) households
almost unanimously prefer ethanol fuel over charcoal for its speed and cleanliness, except for long-cook
food staples such as cassava, rice, and beans. Ethanol is seen as too expensive for the slow coked
stable foods. When asked if the respondents soak beans or rice before cooking to decrease the cooking
time and hence fuel use, the practice was unheard of prior to the interview.
Likewise, respondents in the urban areas cited the need for a simple stove in Madagascar for use by
domestic workers. Negative events may play a disproportionate effect in the perception of domestic

worker’s abilities. Negativity bias refers to the finding that negative events tend to have greater
salience and strength than positive ones; in other words, “bad is stronger than good” (Baumeister,
Bratslavsky, Finkenauer & Vohs, 2001). In this context, domestic worker’s low skills and limited training
may give rise to limited ability to operate clean stoves and/or to them committing errors when allowed
to use the device. This could act to further reinforce or confirm negative perceptions about their ability.
Owing to negativity bias, single negative events may have great power, whereas multiple and consistent
positive events may be necessary for disconfirmation (Baumeister et al., 2001). One solution may be to
recruit domestic workers and train them in advance through the ethanol stove distributor. This could
serve multiple purposes, including encouraging female households’ heads to allow their domestic
worker to use the clean stove (e.g., by making salient that domestic workers can learn and use the
stove correctly) and counteracting possible low perceived control over stove use by domestic workers.
In particular, observing a “peer” performing the target behavior may empower domestic workers to
learn through the training and make use of the acquired knowledge.
Additionally, as in household interviews in Rwanda, respondents mentioned the different taste

obtained by cooking on different types of stoves. In such contexts, experiencing a new technology in a
social setting or observing the adoption behavior of others, especially trusted or similar individuals,
could help to encourage the take up of a new technology (Miller and Mobarak, 2014). For example, if
households could experiment themselves with a technology and witness their peers’ reactions to such
items, they might reassess their assumptions about the contexts in which different types of stoves are
appropriate. Moreover, a recent USAID study (2020) suggests that while households are generally aware
of how the stove operates, they could benefit from further learning around temperature control and
cannister use. Temperature, in particular, may impact the final cooked product and its taste.

VI. POTENTIAL INTERVENTIONS
FOR CONSIDERATION

A NOTE ON
COMMUNICATION CHANNELS
Internet penetration is low in Madagascar, with only 9.8% of the population with access to the
internet. Mobile use is more accessible, with 41% of the population having a mobile cellular subscription
(World Bank, 2017). Just under 60% of households have a radio, and 20% have a television
(International Telecommunication Union, 2010).
Interestingly, a study on ICT suitability to provide market information to small rural farmers in
Madagascar found that direct communication was the main source of information - farmers
communicate with neighbors or with collectors they met in the village or at the market. For the most
remote areas, famers get information from their relatives in town as well. Only 5% of farmers in rural
areas said that they get market information from radio and 4% in peri-urban said the same. Radio was
mostly used for entertainment (Andriandralambo et al, 2017).
The study also found that in most families in rural Madagascar that have at least one mobile phone,
someone knows how to use SMS; however, it can be the oldest child and not the head of the family. In
peri-urban areas however, SMS was found to be the best way to provide information. Mobile phone
access went from 46% in rural areas in the study to 75% in peri-urban areas in the study
(Andriandralambo et al, 2017).
One of the major constraints observed in using mobile phones for diffusion of information in rural
areas was the rapid “disappearance” of the recipients. This was because they lose their mobile phone
and then change their phone number, they switch to another phone company that make a better
commercial offer, they give their mobile to a relative, or because they indicate someone else’s phone
number during initial surveys. Yet other constraints around use of mobile phones were: (i) only 5% rural
household have access to electricity which makes charging phones an issue; (ii) service of mobile phone
companies is limited in rural areas, as even around the capital city, farmers need to move to specific
places to be able to use their mobile phones; (iii) some very cheap mobile phones are not suitable for
receiving SMS (Andriandralambo et al, 2017).
A NOTE ON
HOUSEHOLD DYNAMICS
On average, household size varies from 4.7 in rural areas to 4.4 in urban zones. Very few households
have nine or more people (7%) although this is more common in rural areas and least common in the
capital. Nearly one household in four (22%) is headed by a woman. This proportion varies from 21% in
rural areas to 26% in the urban zone (INSTAT, DHS, 2004).

1. BRANDING STOVES WITH MEMORABLE NAME EMPHASIZING MOST -
VALUED STOVE ATTRIBUTE
B ARR IE R A D DRE S SE D
Low valuation of stove benefits
The type of information provided about a product as well as the ways in which this information is
communicated can have a large effect on how it is perceived by potential households.
High valuation of convenience, time savings and cleanliness relative to other attributes amongst those
interviewed in the present study. Though ethanol was relatively low on the list of preferred fuels in
2011, low cook times, low costs and cleanliness of fuel options stood out as the primary drivers of fuel
choice for households in this study. Furthermore, among those who had adopted ethanol cookstoves,
experiences were positive. Users considered their ethanol stoves to be better than their previous stoves,
describing them as “clean”, as “save(ing) time”/“make(ing) life easier” and as “easy to use” (World Bank,
2011).
The Madagascar MTF survey (World Bank, 2020) suggests that ethanol stoves could save households a
great deal of time that they usually commit to fuel collection/acquisition and stove preparation.
Households currently spend around 20 minutes per day collecting fuel and 20 minutes to prepare their
stove before each use. Furthermore, the burden of these tasks falls most to women (for example, 94%
of women spend time collecting fuel, compared to 45% of men).
As women and adolescent girls are largely responsible for household chores like cooking, most of the
time they are the ones who are directly exposed to hazardous smoke. A World Bank clean energy study
in 2016 noted that while the development sector is more focused on the long-term benefits on health
and environment, women’s needs and preferences are rather shaped by present-day constraints, such
as childcare, household tasks, and income generating activities (Durix, 2016). The study noted the stove
users want direct, immediate, and concrete benefits from new fuels and cookstoves. In the context of
low-income households with low bandwidth, where day-to-day struggles could take precedence over
long-term concerns (Mullainathan and Shafir, 2013), highly valued benefits should clearly reflect the
daily needs and preferences of women and be integrated into the communication.
Since households showed little concern for the health risks associated with charcoal and wood burning
stoves, information and advertisement campaigns would do well to focus on other, more highly valued
attributes. For example, campaigns that focus on environmental attributes, the ease of cooking with
ethanol stoves (especially in the rain) or discounts relating to carbon credits would be more appealing to
households.

In rural areas, where information diffusion via media and social media is relatively low, face-to-face
delivery of stove information using door-to-door campaigns could be worth considering. It could be
used as a way to increase demand by answering individuals’ concerns, as well as by ensuring that
households’ financial decisionmakers are those who are targeted. This technique generated a high
purchase rate in Bensch and Peters’ 2016 study in Senegal. Community leaders and stove adopters from
the community (ideally, the same person) could be engaged in the campaign, and women’s groups could
be used as an entry point to disseminate information about stove benefits. Alternatively (or
additionally), in urban and peri-urban areas, where Facebook is popular and internet access is common,
a social media campaign could be a cost-effective way of spreading information about these products.
Information could be made especially memorable by developing a catchy brand for the stoves
(Goodwin et al, 2015). For example, branding the stoves to relate with attributes that households value
most highly would increase the salience of these benefits. These attributes are clean fuel, time savings
and ease of use. More work needs to be done to identify the most prominent attribute of the stove
valued by households.
To make benefits salient, a calendar could be distributed with messages about time savings as they
would accumulate if households adopted an ethanol stove. The calendar could visually represent air
quality improvements over time with stove ownership: Start with gradations of black that get lighter
over time and then completely white in the end, depicting the decrease in black smoke in air after
shifting away from charcoal.
2. COMMITMENT DEVICES, GOAL-MONITORING,

AND POSITIVE PEER EXAMPLES TO INCREASE SAVINGS
Challenges to saving
Though it is unclear whether present bias or stove cost is the greater barrier to ethanol stove purchase,
interventions to boost saving will help households, present biased or otherwise, to work towards this
milestone. In the implementation of the savings interventions described below, differential effects for
present biased individuals and time consistent individuals will be estimated, in order to determine the
extent to which time inconsistency is a barrier for stove purchase in this context.

Increasing salience of savings goals. Stoves represent a lumpy expense for households, and microcredit
is not considered an attractive option for household purchases. For this reason, an intervention that aids
household saving could increase the purchase of ethanol stoves. Since only 1 in 4 of households
interviewed in the Madagascar MTF Survey have access to formal financial institutions (and most of
these being a bank or mobile money for payments rather than savings), and just 1% were members of
informal savings groups (World Bank, 2020), an intervention which facilitates saving at home for a stove
could help households with purchases.
To assist households to commit to saving for a stove, a combination of materials to facilitate mental
accounting and savings aspirations could be beneficial. For example, households could be given a special
container for stove savings, as well a calendar to monitor their progress over time. A calendar that
includes clear progress markers alongside inspirational pictures or messages from role models (such as
the First Lady) could both serve as a monitoring device and to boost savings aspirations. Indeed, Lybbert
and Wydick (2016) found that savings significantly increased in Mexico when households were given
visible fridge magnets on which to write their goals and chart their progress. These magnets also
featured inspirational quotes from scripture as encouragement to participants. Given the success of role
models for promoting ethanol cookstoves in Madagascar to date, we suggest using inspirational quotes
from local role models rather than scripture.
If necessary, savings plans could also be timed to coincide with fluctuations in household income, such
as changes due to seasonality of agricultural income. For example, this intervention could be designed
to start just after the harvest for agricultural households, while gifting savings containers and prompting
commitment to save in advance of that period (Duflo et al, 2011).
Using positive peer savings examples to increase aspirations. To promote savings and aspirations for
the stove, peer effects could be further leveraged through short videos showcasing positive examples of
members in the community (or nearby) saving for and then acquiring an ethanol stove. These videos
could be shown in group settings, especially in women’s groups. Bernard et al. (2014) found that
showing poor Ethiopian farmers videos of peers who had achieved business success through productive
investments led to several positive results six months after. Relative to control and placebo groups,
treated farmers displayed increased aspirations as well as higher savings, investments in education and
use of credit.
Combining the video intervention with public viewer savings commitments to purchase a stove by a
certain date would provide an additional measure of accountability. Since savings groups are rare in
Madagascar, such accountability mechanisms would need to be set up specifically for this purpose.
Alternatively, individuals could be paired with a peer in the community (e.g. someone with personal
proximity to the saver or who already has the stove). These would act as “monitor” of progress towards
the savings goal, thus leveraging peer accountability/making it social. Breza and Chandrasekhar (2015)
found that assigning random monitors to people in a village in India increases savings balances by 35%.
The monitor’s position in the social network as well as proximity to the saver were both important
determinants of impact.

3. FIX PRICE DISTORTIONS BY REINTRODUCING
DIFFERENT BUT SUSTAINABLE TIME-LIMITED
DISCOUNTS AS PRICE INCENTIVES
Price anchoring
Informational campaigns could try to further stimulate demand by building in price incentives for
households. For example, they could advertise time-limited discounts or discounts for households who
commit to stove purchases during a visit. Time-limited offers and price discounts for up-front
commitment at timely moment have proved successful methods of encouraging technology adoption
amongst low income households in the agricultural literature (Duflo, 2011).
There is some indication in the context of Madagascar that time-limited offers might encourage
households to purchase stoves, since the impression of scarcity does seem to increase aspirations for
ethanol cookstoves for some Malagasy households. In response to a brief shortage of the stoves in the
Ambilobe region, some families started putting away small savings to work towards stove purchase.
Creating a time-limited stove discount could work in a similar way to stove shortages, since it also
creates a limited window in which households can make a purchase.
Alternatively, the discount could be framed as a matching subsidy, or cognitive strategies could be
used to "de-anchor" households. The stove is being sold at the carbon credit subsidized price of 70,000
AR ($20), which is down from the full price of 350,000 AR ($100). Framing could be changed from a
discount to match, i.e. advertising that the household’s stove payment would receive a match of $280
AR or 4 times the value they are investing. Such subsidies have been found to increase amounts donated
to charity relative to comparable rebates for donors (Eckel & Grossman, 2003). Eckel and Grossman
hypothesize that this effect hints at the importance of collaboration and of an individual’s ‘gross
contribution’ when it comes to donations towards a ‘common good’. The behavioral intervention could
test whether framing the purchase of ethanol stoves as a ‘common good’ (owing to the stove benefits to
the family and community) and using a matching frame could increase uptake of these technologies.
Additionally, anchoring is effectively a cognitive bias in which new information is considered in relation
to that strong reference point which can cause perception distortions such as in the present case. There
is some evidence that cognitive strategies such listing arguments that speak against a given anchor (i.e.
considering the opposite strategy) can help minimize anchoring (Mussweiler et al, 2000). This approach
could be used in designing communication messages around the price.

Behavioral interventions involving pricing will need to be cautious of possible anchoring effects that
could reduce demand in the longer term (i.e. if prices increase after a certain period). In order to
minimize this effect, such interventions should allow adequate time for households to save towards
purchasing stoves at the reduced price, as well as extensive publication of any offer-expiry dates.
Further, these time-limited discounts could be offered through the First Lady’s campaign to obtain a
possible re-anchoring of households who might still be anchored at her one-day promotional offer of $3.
4. SOCIALIZING STOVE INFORMATION DIFFUSION THROUGH

DEMONSTRATIONS, ROLE MODELS, AND SOCIAL NETWORKS
B ARR IE R S A D DRE SSE D
Awarenessofofstove
Awareness stovebenefits
benefits
Cookingnorms
Cooking norms
Social influence has been shown to sway customers taste perceptions (Burnkrant & Cousineau, 1975)
and this can be harnessed to promote the uptake of ethanol stoves at the extensive margin as well as
the sustained use at the intensive margin (e.g., decrease the amount of stove stacking).
a) Uptake
Leveraging social Networks. Social networks could help to increase household adoption of ethanol
cookstoves. Along with the First Lady, the top method of learning about ethanol stoves cited amongst
rural households during fieldwork was witnessing their use by neighbors. Harnessing respected social
leaders (Sunstein, 1996) with large networks who have access to and use a stove could also be a useful
tool for encouraging stove diffusion. Role models or social leaders could be broadcast on social media
and/or visit specific areas to attend the cooking demonstrations- or even participate in them.
Since adoption of ethanol stoves has been low despite stove owners’ positive experiences, it seems that
positive messages from trusted and relatable sources may currently be lacking. Increasing the
transmission of positive experiences from users to non-users could help boost non-users’ stove
valuation through trusted sources. Miller and Mobarak (2014) find that experiences of ICS from within a
household’s social networks affect adoption in Bangladesh, especially for features of the technologies
that are not immediately visible to potential buyers. They find social learning to be especially important
when other information is unavailable and when a technology is very new for a community.

Using demonstrations. Demonstration events can be organized by local churches to familiarize
households with ethanol stoves in a social environment. These events will involve cooking
demonstrations/competitions (including slow cooked dishes), in which attendees taste dishes made on
ethanol cookstoves and vote for their favorite. Clarity about stove purchase and price can be
communicated at the events.
In Madagascar, the power of social information diffusion could be harnessed in existing networks, such
as within church communities. Representatives of several national churches have confirmed their
interest in ethanol stoves. These communities could be used to hold communal cooking events on a
monthly basis where community members can sign up (as individuals or in groups) to cook on ethanol
cookstoves. Domestic workers can be encouraged to attend and participate in the cooking event. A
trained professional can be present to assist with any operational questions and incentives such as small
rewards (for both the female cook and the male head of the household, as the latter is likely to play a
critical role in the financial decision-making) can be offered for the most-voted dish. Further, stoves can
remain in the venue for the week following the event for anyone to try out, and households can be
allowed to take them home so that they can gain more personal, in-depth experience in cooking with
them.
b) Sustained Use
Using role models. As mentioned, the First Lady has served as an effective role model both for
increasing households’ desire to own an ethanol cookstove as well as for boosting awareness about the
importance of clean cookstoves. Her influence has been especially strong in rural areas, while kiosks
were most important for raising awareness in urban areas. Interestingly, her speeches had inspired
environmentalism in even the poorest of the households that we interviewed.
An intervention that leverages role models such as (and possibly including) the First Lady as change
agents could help to encourage behavior change at scale (Valente & Pumpuang, 2007), and be directed
towards shifting cooking norms to decrease stove stacking. This could take the format of a (radio)
miniseries, such as lunch with the role model, with popular recipes featured, tips to cook on the stove,
and comments on taste of food (considering the identified barriers). New stove users could also be given
the opportunity to be featured, e.g. through a lottery system.

5. HABIT FORMATION OF ENERGY
EFFICIENT COOKING PRACTICES
Cooking norms
Cooking norms
In the USAID study (2020), households almost unanimously prefer ethanol fuel over charcoal for its
speed and cleanliness, except for slow-cooked food staples such as cassava, rice, and beans. This was
validated by our fieldwork; ethanol is seen as too expensive for the slow-cooked stable foods, mostly
from its perception as a stove that burns fuel quickly and with high heat, and in return is used for quick-
heating such as boiling water and reheating food.
If staple foods are still preferable to be cooked over charcoal regardless if the household has an
ethanol stove, cooking norms need to shift to adapt to cooking on an ethanol burner (i.e. if ethanol
stoves are expected to replace wood and charcoal stoves). Normalizing energy efficient cooking
practices is one way to shift behavior to increase use of the ethanol stoves at the intensive margin. One
powerful energy efficient cooking practice with a staple food item is soaking beans. Soaking beans
overnight reduces the time to cook in water by 30%- 50%. Soaking the beans also improves bean
texture, with fewer split-open beans. Nutritionally, soaking the beans and then using the brine when
boiling, improves the body’s ability to absorb minerals and proteins. However, when asked if the
respondents soak beans or rice before cooking to decrease the cooking time and hence fuel use, the
practice was unheard of prior to the interview.
According to the habit formation literature, a new habit is most successfully formed when an
individual has an anchor point in the day to integrate the new behavior and an environmental cue to
explicitly pair with the habit (Wood and Neal, 2007). To create a habit of soaking beans overnight, a
campaign could motivate households to use the tradition of cooking beans at dinner (environmental
cue) to remind the household to use a simple and low-cost aide – a bean soaking container with a water
line indicated – to put raw beans in the container and fill it up to the water line for the next day’s
cooking. This simple habit change can lead to increased use of ethanol stove at the intensive margin, as
well as potentially overall fuel savings for the household due to a shift to energy efficient cooking
practices. For households that have difficulty forming a new habit, a second low-cost aide can be
provided with the cookstove – a Styrofoam finishing container, which would allow the household to boil
the beans, turn off the burner, and then enclose the stove within the finishing container in its par
cooked state to slow cook over time.

To further support the habit formation, the campaign can provide microlearning, such as reminders
each new energy efficient cooking practice in a calendar. Modern Energy Cooking Services (MECS)
designed an eCookBook in Kenya to support informed choices about fuels and appliance choices, with
illustrations showing how energy relates to money and time so the cook and household understands
how to save by shifting to energy efficient cooking practices, such as bean soaking. To adapt this tool
for bandwidth-constrained households, the campaign could take one key energy efficient practice and
its relative money and time savings to depict per each month of the calendar. If the calendar is placed in
the household kitchen, the daily salience of the money and time savings – as well as the instructions,
water container aide, and environmental cue- could shift norms around cooking.

VII. A CALL TO ACTION:
NEXT STEPS
Behavioral solutions provide a

complementary set of tools for the
policymaker to increase uptake and
sustained use of ethanol cookstoves in
Madagascar by providing alternative
savings strategies through increased
motivation, aspirations, and savings
mindsets of households to decrease
affordability gaps and increase the
salience of stove benefits to alleviate
barriers around lack of formal savings
vehicles, price distortions, and low
valuation of stove benefits. Promoting
habit formation for energy efficient
cooking practices can shift cooking
norms to increase the use of ethanol
cookstoves for staple food items. Either
independently or in combination, the
proposed behavioral solutions can
decrease the dependence on biomass
for cooking, and in turn, the detrimental
health effects and environmental
consequences affecting the country.

VIII. REFERENCES
Africa CDC. (2020). COVID-19 Daily Updates, African Union. Available at: https//:africacdc.org/covid-19/.
(Accessed: 2 November 2020).
Akpalu, W., Dasmani, I. and Aglobitse, P.B. (2011). Demand for cooking fuels in a developing country: To what
extent do taste and preferences matter? Energy Policy, 39(10), pp.6525–6531.
Ashraf, N., Karlan, D. and Yin, W. (2006). Tying Odysseus to the Mast: Evidence From a Commitment Savings
Product in the Philippines. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), pp.635–672.
Ashraf, N., Berry, J. and Shapiro, J.M. (2010). Can Higher Prices Stimulate Product Use? Evidence from a Field
Experiment in Zambia. American Economic Review, 100(5), pp.2383–2413.
Andriandralambo, N., David-Benz, H. and Rahelizatovo, N. (2017). Providing market information to small
farmers in Madagascar. Challenging ICTs suitability. In: SFER. [online] Journées de Recherches en Sciences
Sociales. Cirad-Agritrop, p.16. Available at:
https://agritrop.cirad.fr/586657/1/Andriandralambo%202017_Providing%20mkt%20info%20to%20small%20fa
rmers%20in%20Mada.pdf [Accessed 4 Dec. 2019].
Benka-Coker, M.L., Tadele, W., Milano, A., Getaneh, D. and Stokes, H. (2018). A case study of the ethanol
CleanCook stove intervention and potential scale-up in Ethiopia. Energy for Sustainable Development, 46,
pp.53–64.
Bensch, G. and Peters, J. (2016). Enablers of strong cookstove sales through a purchase offer approach in rural
Senegal: An explorative analysis. RWI – Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Essen. Ruhr Economic Papers,
No. 650.
Bensch, G. and Peters, J. (2019). One‐Off Subsidies and Long‐Run Adoption—Experimental Evidence on
Improved Cooking Stoves in Senegal. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 102(1), pp.72–90.
Bernard, T., Dercon S., Orkin, K., and Taffesse, A.S. (2014). The Future in Mind: Aspirations and Forward-
Looking Behavior in Rural Ethiopia. Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford. CSAE
Working Paper Series, 2014-16.
Bernard, T. and Taffesse, A.S. (2014). Aspirations: An Approach to Measurement with Validation Using
Ethiopian Data. Journal of African Economies, 23(2), pp.189–224.

Breza, E, and Chandrasekhar, A. (2015). Social networks, reputation, and commitment: Evidence from a savings
monitors experiment. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 21169.
Cohen, J, and Dupas, P. (2010). Free Distribution or Cost-Sharing? Evidence from a Randomized Malaria
Prevention Experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125 (1), pp.1-45.
Demirguc-Kunt, A, Klapper, L., Singer, D, Ansar, S and Hess, J. (2018). The Global Findex Database 2017:
Measuring Financial Inclusion and the Fintech Revolution. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Available at:
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/29510 [Accessed 4 Dec. 2019].
D’Hoore, A. and Sulla, V. (2014). Face of poverty in Madagascar : poverty, gender, and inequality assessment
(English). Washington, DC: World Bank Group, Table B2. Available at:
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/538821468271809604/Face-of-poverty-in-Madagascar-poverty-
gender-and-inequality-assessment [Accessed 4 Dec. 2019].
Duflo, E., Kremer, M., and Robinson, J. (2011). Nudging farmers to use fertilizer: Theory and experimental
evidence from Kenya. American Economic Review, 101(6), pp.2350-90.
Dupas, P. and Robinson, J. (2013). Why Don’t the Poor Save More? Evidence from Health Savings
Experiments. American Economic Review, 103(4), pp.1138–1171.
Eckel, C.C. and Grossman, P.J. (2003). Rebate versus matching: does how we subsidize charitable contributions
matter? Journal of Public Economics, 87(3–4), pp.681–701.
Goodwin, N.J., O’Farrell, S.E., Jagoe, K., Rouse, J., Roma, E., Biran, A. and Finkelstein, E.A. (2015). Use of
Behavior Change Techniques in Clean Cooking Interventions: A Review of the Evidence and Scorecard of
Effectiveness. Journal of Health Communication, 20(sup1), pp.43–54.
Haaland, I., Roth, C. and Wohlfart, J. (2020). Designing information provision experiments. University of
Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI), CEBI working
paper series 20-20.
Institut National De La Statistique (INSTAT) [Madagascar] and Orc Macro. (2005). Madagascar: Demographic
and Health Survey 2003-2004: Key Findings. Calverton, Maryland, USA.
International Energy Agency (IEA). 2018. World Energy Outlook 2018. Paris. Available at:
https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2018. [Accessed: 4 December, 2019].

International Telecommunication Union (ITU). (2010). World Telecommunication/ICT Development Report
Target 8. Available at: https://www.itu.int/ITU-
D/ict/publications/wtdr_10/material/WTDR2010_Target8_e.pdf. [Accessed: 3 November, 2020].
JPAL (The Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab). (2018). The impact of price on take-up and use of preventive
health products. Available at: https://www.povertyactionlab.org/policy-insight/impact-price-take-and-use-
preventive-health-products [Accessed 20 Nov. 2020].
Karlan, D., Ratan, A. L., and Zinman, J. (2014). Savings by and for the Poor: A Research Review and
Agenda. Review of Income and Wealth, 60(1), 36-78.
Kast, F., Meier, S. and Pomeranz, D. (2018). Saving more in groups: Field experimental evidence from
Chile. Journal of Development Economics, 133, pp.275-294.
Kremer, M, and Miguel, E. (2007). The Illusion of Sustainability. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122, pp.1007-
1065.
Kremer, M, Leino, J, Miguel, E and Zwane, AP. (2011). Spring Cleaning: Rural Water Impacts, Valuation, and
Property Rights Institutions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126 (1), pp.145–205
Lybbert, T.J. and Wydick, B. (2016). Hope as aspirations, agency, and pathways: poverty dynamics and
microfinance in Oaxaca, Mexico. National Bureau of Economic Research, No. w22661.
Modern Energy Cooking Solutions (MECS). (2019). The Kenya eCOOKBOOK, Beans & Cereals Edition: How to
Save Time & Money. Available at: https://www.mecs.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/The-Kenya-
eCookbook-Beans-Cereals-edition-3-July-FULL-RECREATED-WEB-1-4mb.pdf. (Accessed: November 11, 2020).
Mobarak, A.M., Dwivedi, P., Bailis, R., Hildemann, L. and Miller, G. (2012). Low demand for nontraditional
cookstove technologies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(27), pp.10815-10820.
Miller, G. and Mobarak, A.M. (2014). Learning about new technologies through social networks: experimental
evidence on nontraditional stoves in Bangladesh. Marketing Science, 34(4), pp.480-499.
Mudombi, S., Nyambane, A., von Maltitz, G.P., Gasparatos, A., Johnson, F.X., Chenene, M.L. and Attanassov, B.
(2018). User perceptions about the adoption and use of ethanol fuel and cookstoves in Maputo,
Mozambique. Energy for sustainable development, 44, pp.97-108.
Mussweiler, T., Strack, F. and Pfeiffer, T. (2000). Overcoming the inevitable anchoring effect: Considering the
opposite compensates for selective accessibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, pp.1142-1150.

Pattanayak, S.K., Jeuland, M.A., Lewis, J.J., Bhojvaid, V., Brooks, N., Kar, A., Lipinski, L., Morrison, L., Patange,
O., Ramanathan, N. and Rehman, I.H. (2016). Cooking up change in the Himalayas: experimental evidence on
cookstove promotion. Duke Environmental and Energy Economics, Working Paper Series EE 16, 3.
Pennise, D., Brant, S., Agbeve, S. M., Quaye, W., Mengesha, F., Tadele, W., & Wofchuck, T. (2009). Indoor air
quality impacts of an improved wood stove in Ghana and an ethanol stove in Ethiopia. Energy for Sustainable
Development, 13(2), pp.71–76.
Sunstein, C.R. (1996). Social norms and social roles. Columbia law review, 96(4), pp.903-968.
USAID. (2020). ISP Madagascar: Ethanol Cooking Strategy and Roadmap – Demand and Supply Analysis Report.
Valente, T.W. and Pumpuang, P. (2007). Identifying opinion leaders to promote behavior change. Health
Education & Behavior, 34(6), pp.881-896.
Wood, W. and Neal, D.T. (2007). A new look at habits and the habit-goal interface. Psychological
review, 114(4), p.843.
World Bank. (2011). Ethanol as a household fuel in Madagascar : health benefits, economic assessment, and
review of African lessons for scaling-up: summary report (English). Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group.
Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/564801468055752320/Ethanol-as-a-household-
fuel-in-Madagascar-health-benefits-economic-assessment-and-review-of-African-lessons-for-scaling-up-
summary-report. [Accessed 4 December, 2019].
World Bank and International Energy Agency (World Bank and IEA). (2017). Global Tracking Framework 2017.
Washington, DC. Available at:
https://www.seforall.org/sites/default/files/GTF%20Executive%20Summary%202017.pdf. [Accessed 4
December, 2019].
World Bank. (2014). Face of Poverty in Madagascar, Poverty, Gender, and Inequality Assessment. Washington,
DC. Available at:
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/538821468271809604/pdf/781310PRIORITY0English0Apr900Ma
y012.pdf. [Accessed: 4 December, 2019].
World Bank. (2016). Measuring Urban Living Standards in Antananarivo 2016. Madagascar. Available at:
https://microdata.worldbank.org/index.php/catalog/2926. [Accessed: 24 March, 2020].
World Bank. (2016b). Project Information Document (PID) MG ethanol clean cooking climate finance program
(P154440). Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/395881468266106457/pdf/PID-
Appraisal-Print-P154440-04-21-2016-1461259255237.pdf. [Accessed: 3 November, 2020].

World Bank, 2016c. Project Appraisal Document, Ethanol Clean Cooking Finance Program (P154440). Available
at: https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-
reports/documentdetail/529131468046471854/integrated-safeguards-data-sheet-appraisal-stage-mg-
ethanol-clean-cooking-climate-finance-program-p154440. [Accessed: 3 November, 2020].
World Bank, World Development Indicators. (2017). Individuals using the Internet (% of population). Available
at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.ZS?name_desc=false&view=chart. [Accessed: 3
November, 2020].
World Bank, World Development Indicators. (2017). Mobile cellular subscriptions (per 100 people). Available
at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.CEL.SETS.P2?view=chart. [Accessed: 3 November, 2020].
World Bank. (2019). The World Bank in Madagascar. Available at:

https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/madagascar/overview. [Accessed: 4 December, 2019].
World Bank. (2020). Multi-Tier Framework Data: Madagascar. World Bank Group. Forthcoming at
https://energydata.info/.
World Data. (2020). Inflation Rates of the Madagascan Aviary. Available at:
https://www.worlddata.info/africa/madagascar/inflation-rates.php. [Accessed: 3 November, 2020].
World Health Organization (WHO). (2016). Global Household Energy database. Available at:
https://www.who.int/airpollution/data/household-energy-database/en/. [Accessed: 4 December, 2019].
World Health Organization. (2018). Household Air Pollution and Health.”. Available at: www.who.int/news-
room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health. [Accessed: 3 November, 2020].
Wu, X, Nethery, RC, Sabath, BM, Braun, D and Dominici, F. (2020). Exposure to air pollution and COVID-19
mortality in the United States. Science Advances, 6(45).
Zhu, Y, Xiebc, J, Huangb, F, and Liqing, C. (2020). Association between short-term exposure to air pollution and
COVID-19 infection: Evidence from China. Science of the total environment, 727.
IX. ANNEXES
Annex A: Additional Information on Ci-Dev, eMBeD and ESMAP Units
The Carbon Initiative for Development (Ci-Dev)

The Carbon Initiative for Development (Ci-Dev) is a trust fund that mobilizes private finance for clean energy
access in low-income countries. It works to award results-based finance to innovative emissions reduction
projects driven by the private sector. By 2025, Ci-Dev will have mobilized over $250 million of finance and
provided cleaner energy to above 10 million people from amongst the communities most vulnerable to the
effects of climate change (Ci-Dev, 2020).
The main objectives of the Carbon Initiative for Development are four-fold. The fund seeks to support private
sector models in the energy access sector using results-based climate (RBF) finance. It works to identify the
uses of carbon revenues that can most benefit these business models, as well as to test the effect that carbon
revenues can have on those who benefit from them. Finally, the fund works to provide insights into how post-
2020 transitions can effectively take place in the context of a real-world portfolio.
Ci-Dev comprises two components; a Readiness Fund and a Carbon Fund. The Readiness fund supports
countries to build capacity towards emissions reductions, such as by establishing standardized baselines,
setting up technical assistance for carbon reduction projects and developing technologies for simplifying
carbon reduction rules as well as disseminating results. The Carbon Fund provides results-based payments to
projects based on their carbon emissions reductions.
Ci-Dev’s portfolio represents a very significant investment to support energy access and access to clean
cooking in the developing world. However, supply side interventions may not always have the desired effects if
household demand for and usage of such technologies remains low. A collaboration between Ci-Dev and the
World Bank’s Mind Behavior and Development Unit seeks to bridge this gap by complementing the primarily
supply-side energy access interventions with scaled-up actions that bolster demand. The design and
deployment of such demand side actions will be informed by behavioral science, which to-date is an
underutilized tool in this field.
The Mind, Behavior, and Development Unit (eMBeD)
The Mind, Behavior, and Development Unit (eMBeD), the World Bank’s behavioral science team based in the
Poverty & Equity Global Practice, works closely with project teams, governments, and other partners to
diagnose, design, and evaluate behaviorally informed interventions. Behaviorally informed policy emphasizes
the importance of context for decision making and behavior. It examines a wide set of influences, paying
attention to the psychological, social, and cultural factors that affect what people think and do – in addition to
structural considerations such as legal and economic incentives. Addressing these factors can help enhance
service delivery, take-up, and usage of different programs and processes, and amplify the impact of these
reforms. Behaviorally informed interventions may therefore involve small tweaks and enhancements of
existing programs and processes, often at low cost.
As mentioned earlier, conventional approaches to low carbon energy access are often insufficient for aligning
the incentives of all involved parties to achieve a sustainable and efficient outcome. Indeed, since individuals
do not always respond as expected to policies, regulations, and incentives, technical innovations must be
accompanied by sustained changes that address individual behaviors and preferences. The behavioral

approach can be both individualistic and impactful across whole communities, such as by combining incentives
with supporting shifts societal norms to achieve more sustainable resource use. Long-lasting behavioral shifts
require developing policy tools informed by a rich understanding of how individuals within society respond to
incentives, the ways in which they change their behavior, and the prevailing social norms and their origins.
Developing and testing behavior change interventions that complement traditional instruments to increase
clean energy access offers an opportunity to increase cost effectiveness and move the needle on improving
development outcomes of existing low carbon energy technology projects and programs. A cross-GP
collaboration with Poverty & Equity’s Mind, Behavior, and Development Unit (eMBeD), Climate Change (Ci-
Dev), Energy & Extractives (EEX), and Environment (ENV) will leverage international expertise to address
bottlenecks in the adoption and sustained use of low carbon energy access technologies in Africa. Specifically,
the portfolio includes two sequential phases. Phase 1 (Diagnostic) comprised the analysis of bottlenecks and
behavioral solutions to uptake and sustained use of improved cookstoves or clean cookstoves in Madagascar,
Ghana, and Rwanda, as well as uptake and sustained use of solar home systems in Ethiopia, Senegal, and
Uganda. In Phase 2, behavioral interventions designed in Phase 1 will be tested in three countries to evaluate
their impact and create and disseminate a practitioner toolkit that offers models for introducing behavior.
The Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP)
ESMAP is a partnership between the World Bank and partners to help low and middle-income countries
reduce poverty and boost growth through sustainable energy solutions. ESMAP’s analytical and advisory
services are fully integrated within the World Bank’s country financing and policy dialogue in the energy
sector. Through the World Bank Group (WBG), ESMAP works to accelerate the energy transition required to
achieve Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7) to ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and
modern energy for all. It helps to shape WBG strategies and programs to achieve the WBG Climate Change
Action Plan targets.

Madagascar eMBeD Diagnostic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Madagascar eMBeD Diagnostic

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Madagascar eMBeD Diagnostic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Public Disclosure Authorized

BEHAVIORAL DIAGNOSTICS NOTE

Rights and Permissions

Cover photo: Photo: World Bank / Sarah Farhat

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 1

II. CONTEXT ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................... 8

A. PROGRAM OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................................... 8

B. MADAGASCAR OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................ 10

C. MADAGASCAR ENERGY USE .......................................................................................................... 11

D. PROJECT OVERVIEW: CI-DEV MADAGASCAR ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING PROGRAM ................. 11

III. METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................... 14

IV. THE USER JOURNEY ..................................................................................................................... 16

V. BARRIERS TO COOKSTOVE ADOPTION ........................................................................................ 17

A. ECONOMIC BARRIERS TO ADOPTION ............................................................................................ 18

E. BEHAVIORAL BARRIERS TO ADOPTION ......................................................................................... 20

VI. POTENTIAL INTERVENTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION .................................................................... 28

VII. A CALL TO ACTION: NEXT STEPS................................................................................................... 38

VIII. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 39

IX. ANNEXES ..................................................................................................................................... 43

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 2

Households in Madagascar continue to

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 3

Barriers related to purchase of product: Improved ethanol cookstoves are viewed as a

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 4

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 5

• TARGETING BARRIERS TO PURCHASE OF PRODUCT: Encouraging small savings, accruing

• TARGETING BARRIERS TO SUSTAINED USE: Socializing stove information diffusion through

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 6

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 7

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 8

(a) Ethiopia: Ethiopia Off-Grid Renewable Energy Program

(b) Ghana: Ghana Energy Sector Transformation Initiative Project

(c) Madagascar: Madagascar ethanol clean cooking climate finance program

(d) Rwanda: Rwanda Improved Cookstoves Project (Inyenyeri)

(e) Senegal: Senegal Rural Electrification Program

(f) Uganda: Energy Access Scale-up Project (EASP) (EEX)

THE PROJECT REPRESENTS A COLLABORATION BETWEEN THREE

More information on these units is found in Annex A.

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 9

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 10

C. MADAGASCAR ENERGY USE

D. PROJECT OVERVIEW: CI-DEV MADAGASCAR

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 11

1. Data courtesy of Green Development.

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 12

COVID-19 AND INDOOR AIR POLLUTION

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 13

Fieldwork Protocol November 2019

2 The final MTF data and report will be published on https://energydata.info/

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 14

• Rural/peri-urban area (Matiakoho, Matsaborilaidama, and Anoronala):

• 1 FGDs with 10 sugarcane farmers in the

• Sugarcane fields in the Ambilobe region.

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 15

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 16

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 17

Higher cooking cost

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 18

MG ETHANOL CLEAN COOKING CLIMATE FINANCE PROGRAM 19