Energy poverty: Reconciling safety and health dimensions in South Africa

David Kimemia of the University of Johannesburg investigates the interface between energy poverty and energy incidents, using quantitative analysis approaches on energy access and injuries data.

Introduction

Although access to clean, safe, and affordable residential energy services is a necessity for socioeconomic functioning, energy poverty prevails in developing countries. Energy-poor households rely on dirty fuels and inefficient conversion technologies, with attendant safety and health concerns. In South Africa, energy incidents such as shack fires and paraffin poisonings are common phenomena among communities in low income settlements, resulting in fatalities, trauma, and huge economic costs. This project investigates the interface between energy poverty and energy incidents, using quantitative analysis approaches on energy access and injuries data.

Methodology

Quantitative analysis techniques are utilized on secondary data (three datasets - on energy access, fires, and injuries) to investigate the variation between energy poverty and energy-related risks. The data are analyzed for fuel-specific risk ratings which is used to build the household risk index. The risk index is correlated with different measures of energy poverty and general poverty to analyze how such risk is distributed among different population sub-groups in South Africa.

Results

The household risk index is largest in unelectrified households, especially those that use paraffin in their energy mix. Household risk is unevenly spread geographically, partly indicating the different mixes of fuels that are used in different areas. The relationship between household energy related risks and incomes varies non-linearly. The risk initially increases as per capita monthly income rises from below R200, to R200 – R450, and then falls as income rises further. Also, for households below an energy poverty threshold, the risks of energy-related accidents rise with an increase in household energy use, but fall  once households cross this threshold.

Conclusion

The results of this study have shown that energy-poor households in South Africa, especially the residents of informal settlements, are beset with a disproportionately higher share of energy-related risks. This calls for pro-poor policies that promote safer and cleaner energy carriers such as LPG and solar power and formalize  informal settlements. Community education and enforcement of safe stoves standards would also reduce overall risk. 

Supervisors

Bruce Rhodes, University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
Shonali Pachauri, Energy Program (ENE), IIASA

Note

David Kimemia of the University of Johannesburg is a South African citizen. He was funded by IIASA's South African National Member Organization during the YSSP.

Please note these Proceedings have received limited or no review from supervisors and IIASA program directors, and the views and results expressed therein do not necessarily represent IIASA, its National Member Organizations, or other organizations supporting the work.


Print this page

Last edited: 23 March 2015

CONTACT DETAILS

Ulf Dieckmann

Principal Research Scholar Exploratory Modeling of Human-natural Systems Research Group - Advancing Systems Analysis Program

Principal Research Scholar Systemic Risk and Resilience Research Group - Advancing Systems Analysis Program

Principal Research Scholar Cooperation and Transformative Governance Research Group - Advancing Systems Analysis Program

Further information

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Schlossplatz 1, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria
Phone: (+43 2236) 807 0 Fax:(+43 2236) 71 313