Loading...
Loading...
African Journal of Environment and Natural Science Research
Vol. 7Issue 32024pp. 125–141Published 9 August 2024
DOI 10.52589/AJENSR-79QC5UXWShare Link
Cite this
Citation unavailable for this article.
Abstract:
Despite efforts by Nigerian government, the country has continuously faced immense challenges in providing clean, safe and sustainable cooking energy solutions for its citizens. This seems to characterize distinctive households. The study investigated cooking energy (CE) consumption preference and effect among rural and urban households in Katsina State. A sample of 192 rural and urban households was selected using multistage sampling technique from all Katsina State households. Descriptive survey design and structured questionnaire were adopted in collecting data on CE forms, preference, reasons, effect and constraints. Frequency counts, percentages, means, PPMC, Chi-square, and t-test were used in data analysis. Results revealed that mean age and income were similar across groups. Urban households (UB) had higher educational attainment compared to rural households (RH). Both households were characterized by married individuals with children. Charcoal and firewood emerged preferred CE sources, with unexpectedly higher among UB. Gas usage was prevalent, while rising kerosene and electricity prices drove shifts away from these sources. RH exhibited high consumption of charcoal, firewood, and biomass residues. Ease of use, versatility, better taste, and cleanliness were key reasons for CE preferences across households. Statistical analyses revealed a significant positive but weak to moderate relationship between effects scores and CE preferences among RH. Education and gender demonstrated significant associations with CE preferences, in RH. The comparison of mean CE consumption showed a slightly higher level in RH, but the difference was not statistically significant. The findings underscore the importance of tailored energy policies and interventions, addressing constraints related to fire risk, costs, access, technical knowledge, and income opportunities. Consideration of demographic factors is crucial, especially in rural settings where disparities in income, education and preference may persist.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the author(s) and contributor(s) and not of AB Journals or its editors. AB Journals remains neutral and accepts no responsibility for any injury or damage resulting from ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyrights