Thinking Complex about Energy Transitions: Lessons from the Implementation of LPG Gas Bottles in Kenya

Serena Saligari

doi:10.22151/politikon.56.CON1

Authors

Serena Saligari University of Liverpool https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7565-965X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22151/politikon.56.CON1

Keywords:

Social Anthropology, Kenya, Energy Policies, Energy Transition

Abstract

In the informal settlement of Langas, Kenya, access to domestic energy for cooking is a complex and multifaceted issue. Political and infrastructural efforts have promoted LPG gas bottles as a cleaner and more efficient alternative to traditional fuels like firewood and kerosene. However, residents demonstrate a diverse set of contextual concerns that challenge gas bottles’ uptake and prompt questions about how straightforward these energy transitions can be. The ethnographic study I conducted in Langas reveals a significant gap between the way energy transitions to clean fuels are imagined by energy policies and stakeholders and how these are experienced by end-users. While energy policies often reduce energy transitions to mere technological shifts, local communities show that access to energy is a social rather than a technical issue and requires a more inclusive, context-specific, and culturally sensitive approach so that energy solutions appropriate and responsive to their needs can be developed.

Author Biography

Serena Saligari, University of Liverpool

Serena Saligari is a Social Anthropologist working at the intersection of heath, air pollution, and domestic energy in the Global South. Her research primarily focuses on domestic energy practices in Kenya, and explores the social, cultural and structural forces that shape community access to domestic energy for cooking, lighting, and heating houses. She is interested in understanding how domestic energy is understood and valued by locals in relation to other daily priorities and needs, and what can be done to encourage the transition away from polluting energy sources and the adoption of clean energy solutions.

References

Akrich, Madeleine. 1992. The de-scription of technical objects. In Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change edited by Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Bailis, Robert, Rudi Drigo, Adrian Ghilardi, and Omar Masera. 2015. “The carbon footprint of traditional woodfuels.” Nature Clim Change, 5: 266–272. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2491.

Batel, Susana, and Patrick Devine-Wright. 2015. “A critical and empirical analysis of the national-local ‘gap’ in public responses to large-scale energy infrastructures.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58(6): 1076–1095. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2014.914020.

Boyer, Dominic. 2014. “Energopower: An Introduction.” Anthropological Quarterly, 87(2): 309–333. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43652700.

Bruce, Nigel, Lynnette Neufeld, Erick Boy, and Chris West. 1998. “Indoor biofuel air pollution and respiratory health: the role of confounding factors among women in highland Guatemala.” International Journal of Epidemiology, 27 (3): 454–458. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/27.3.454.

Cecelski, Elizabeth. 2005. Energy, Development and Gender: Global Correlations and Causality. ENERGIA: International Network on Gender and Sustainable Energy. https://www.energia.org/assets/2015/06/42-Energy-development-and-gender-global-correlations-and-causality.pdf.

Ellegård, Anders. 1996. “Cooking fuel smoke and respiratory symptoms among women in low-income areas in Maputo.” Environmental health perspectives, 104(9): 980–85. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.104-1469451.

Food and Agriculture Organization. 2018. The State of World’s Forests: Forest Pathway for Sustainable Development. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://www.fao.org/3/ca0188en/ca0188en.pdf.

Frigo, Giovanni. 2017. “Energy ethics, homogenization, and hegemony: A reflection on the traditional energy paradigm.” Energy Research and Social Science, 30: 7–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.06.030.

Grubert, Emily, and Sara Hastings‐Simon. 2022. “Designing the mid-transition: A review of medium-term challenges for coordinated decarbonization in the United States.” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 13(3): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.768.

Health Effects Institute. 2019. State of Global Air. Data source: Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. IHME. https://www.healthdata.org/news-events/newsroom/news-releases/state-global-air-2019-report

International Energy Agency. 2022. World Energy Outlook 2022. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/830fe099-5530-48f2-a7c1-11f35d510983/WorldEnergyOutlook2022.pdf.

Khamati-Njenga, Beatrice, and Joy Clancy. 2003. Concepts and Issues in Gender and Energy. ENERGIA: International Network on Gender and Sustainable Energy.

Lennon, Breffní, Niall P. Dunphy, and Estibaliz Sanvicente. 2019. “Community acceptability and the energy transition: a citizens’ perspective.” Energy, Sustainability and Society 9 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-019-0218-z.

Morozov, Evgeny. 2014. To Save Everything, Click Here. The Folly of Technological Solutionism. New York: Public Affairs.

Murray, Christopher JL, Aleksandr Y. Aravkin, Peng Zheng, Cristiana Abbafati, Kaja M. Abbas, Mohsen Abbasi-Kangevari, Foad Abd-Allah et al. 2020. “Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.” The Lancet, 396(10258): 1223–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30752-2.

Nader, Laura, and Norman Milleron. 1979. “Dimensions of the “people problem” in energy research and “the” factual basis of dispersed energy futures.” Energy, 4(5): 953–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-5442(79)90025-2.

Petrova, Saska, and Neil Simcock. 2021. Gender and energy: Domestic inequities reconsidered. Social and Cultural Geography, 22(6): 849–867. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2019.1645200.

Redfield, Peter. 2012. “Bioexpectations: Life technologies as humanitarian goods.” Public Culture, 24(1): 157–184. https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-1443592.

Rittel, Horst WJ, and Melvin M. Webber. 1973. "Dilemmas in a general theory of planning." Policy Sciences, 4(2): 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730.

Schwittay, Anke. 2014. “Designing development: Humanitarian design in the financial inclusion assemblage.” Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 37(1): 29–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12049.

Smith, Kirk R., Nigel Bruce, Kalpana Balakrishnan, Heather Adair-Rohani, John Balmes, Zoë Chafe, Mukesh Dherani et al. 2014. “Millions dead: How do we know and what does it mean? Methods used in the comparative risk assessment of household air pollution.” Annual Review of Public Health, 35: 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182356.

Suchman, Lucille Alice. 2007. Human-machine reconfigurations. Plans and situated actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sullivan, Oriel. 2018. “The gendered division of household labor.” In Handbook of the sociology of gender edited by Barbara J. Risman, Carissa M. Froyum, and William J. Scarborough. New York: Springer.

World Health Organization. 2022. Household Air Pollution. Key Fact. Available at https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health#:~:text=Each%20year%2C%203.2%20million%20people,air%20pollution%20data%20for%20details.

Woolgar, Steve. 1991. “Configuring the user. The case of usability trials.” In A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology, and domination edited by John Law. London: Routledge.

World Bank, (2020). The energy progress report 2020 - Tracking SDG7. Available at https://www.irena.org/publications/2020/May/Tracking-SDG7-The-Energy-Progress-Report-2020.

Wyatt, Sally. 2008. “Technological determinism is dead; Long live technological determinism.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies edited by Edward J. Hackett, Olga Amsterdamska, Michael Lynch and Judy Wajcman. Cambridge. MIT Press.