Skip to content
EEEP
Menu
  • 2012
    • Volume 1
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
      • Number 3
  • 2013
    • Volume 2
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2014
    • Volume 3
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2015
    • Volume 4
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2016
    • Volume 5
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2017
    • Volume 6
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2018
    • Volume 7
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2019
    • Volume 8
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2020
    • Volume 9
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2021
    • Volume 10
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
    • Volume 9
      • Number 2
  • 2022
    • Volume 10
      • Number 2
    • Volume 11
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2023
    • Volume 11
      • Number 2
    • Volume 12
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2024
    • Volume 13
      • Number 1
      • Number 2
  • 2025
    • Volume 14
      • Number 1
Menu

Economic efficiency and CO2 impact of a clean cooking program in Ecuador

Posted on February 4, 2026February 9, 2026 by admin

Clean cooking programs are implemented to replace polluting fuel technologies and fight climate change. In 2014, Ecuador launched a clean cooking program to improve environmental conditions for its population and reduce the large financial burden spent on liquid petroleum gas subsidies. In this paper, we analyze the economic and environmental impacts of this program. We use official macro-data (2015–2021) instead of surveys, which is not common in the studies about these programs. We find that this program saved 978,470 kton of CO2 and reduced Ecuadorian liquid petroleum gas consumption by 3,845,808 barrels, improving the national balance of trade by 151 million USD. However, the rate of return of the subsidies spent in this program was below one, coming in at only 0.72463. We also determine that the subsidized electricity was indeed generated with hydropower. Based on our results, we provide several regulatory recommendations. Households need efficient economic incentives to switch from one energy source to another, and the replaced fuel cannot remain subsidized. Otherwise, the participation predictions made by the implementing institutions might be too optimistic and result in the unnecessary allocation of economic resources to reinforcing grids and commissioning new electricity-generation plants. Finally, the generation technology used to replace subsidized electricity must be renewable to avoid problematic trade-offs.

Authors: Daniel Davi-Arderius and Moisés Obaco
Download PDFExecutive Summary PDF
Category: Number 1

Tags

Air pollution Appliances Charging infrastructure China Circularity Climate change Climate policy community minigrids Economic growth economic reform electric electricity access Electricity market design Electricity markets Electricity networks Electric vehicles Energy Energy communities energy economics Energy efficiency Energy Efficiency Policy Energy Policy equitable employment evaluation Feminist theory Geopolitics Green bonds informal settlements Introduction Investment Long-term contracts Middle East Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards Natural gas Oil prices Path dependency Regulation Renewable energy Resource adequacy Scenarios Sustainability Sustainable cities sustainable development Tax policies Techno-bias

Archives

  • February 2026
© 2026 EEEP | Powered by Minimalist Blog WordPress Theme