Widening inequities in clean cooking fuel use and food security: compounding effects of COVID-19 restrictions and VAT on LPG in a Kenyan informal urban settlement

In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), 85% of the population (approximately 900 million people) rely on polluting biomass or kerosene fuels; over twice the global average (40%) [14]. The number of Africans cooking with polluting fuels is expected to reach one billion by 2030 [15]. To help accelerate clean cooking fuel access, several countries in SSA have established ambitious goals to scale up LPG use by 2030 [16]. In Kenya, the government is targeting an expansion of LPG use from 20% of the population in 2016 to 35% by 2030 [16, 17]. In 2016, Kenya's Treasury zero-rated the value added tax (VAT) on LPG and increased the VAT on kerosene to 16%. Partly due to these efforts, the proportion of the Kenyan population primarily cook with LPG in 2020 (24%) increased by 4% from 2016 [18].

Informal settlements are characterised by high population density, informal housing and inadequate infrastructure, sanitation and water facilities [19]. In Kenyan informal settlements, energy for cooking, lighting and heating can make up roughly 30% of monthly household expenditures [20]. Residents of informal settlements generally rely on informal work and have little financial savings; thus, many cannot afford to use LPG. Those that do cook with LPG may revert to polluting cooking fuels when LPG prices increase [21]. With over half (55%) of the Kenyan population living in informal settlements [22], overcoming the affordability barrier to sustained use of LPG for cooking in urban Kenya is critical.

Due to the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the Kenyan Government implemented several containment measures, including a nationwide dusk-to-dawn curfew, closure of schools, restaurants and businesses and restrictions on public gatherings. In the five weeks after implementation of these restrictions, household incomes declined by up to one-third [23] and over 4.6 million Kenyans lost their employment [24], The negative impact on livelihoods was particularly severe among Kenyan informal sector workers [25].

International LPG prices also increased because of the COVID-19 pandemic, with Kenya particularly impacted given the lack of price regulations on LPG. Consequently, many Kenyans switched from LPG cheaper polluting fuels (e.g. wood) to reduce their household expenditures [23]. Our previous study conducted in an informal settlement in Nairobi found that one quarter (27%) of families switched from LPG to wood or charcoal during a COVID-19 lockdown (April 2020) [26].

On 1 July 2021, approximately 16 months after the first COVID-19 restrictions were implemented in Kenya, the Government's exemption of LPG from VAT was nullified. The increased cost of LPG due to the VAT re-introduction was passed onto consumers. Thus, the combinations of these events may have intensified the unaffordability of LPG, particularly among poorer Kenyans living in informal settlements.

This study evaluates if two significant events that started in 2020 and 2021 impacted households' cooking behaviors and food security status in an informal settlement in Western Kenya. Alterations in the type of primary fuel used (e.g. from LPG to a polluting fuel) and declines in the amount of LPG consumed would broadly signal stalled progress in clean cooking access, a key monitoring indicator for United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 7. This study further investigates potential compounding impacts of COVID-19 restrictions and the VAT re-introduction on livelihoods and energy and food security to determine if particular sub-groups (e.g. lower-income households, informal sectors workers) were disproportionately affected.

Three quarters (75%; n = 1147) of participants reported that a decline in income while under COVID-19 restrictions, with 30% (n = 452) reporting no income earned (table 2). Among the 695 (45%) households that reported earning less income while under COVID-19 restrictions, almost half (n = 326; 47%) indicated having less earnings for more than six months. Over half (54%) of households with the head employed as an informal sector worker that earned less income did not return to their pre-pandemic wages for six months or longer, compared with 41% of government or business employees, 37% of farmers and 18% of craftspeople (e.g. tailors, carpenters, seamstresses) (supplementary figure 5).

Nearly three quarters (70%; n = 316) of the 452 households that reported having no income indicated their lack of earnings lasted for more than six months. A larger percentage of informal sector workers (85%) than government or business employees (61%) stated they earned no income for at least six months (table 2).

Four in five (79%) participants were out of work for at least one week due to COVID-19 restrictions, with over half (53%; n = 798) out of work for over nine weeks. One third (n = 519) of participants were not working for more than six months in 2020. The amount of time individuals were unemployed due to COVID-19 restrictions also varied substantially by occupation; 70% of informal sector workers did not work for more than two months in 2020, compared with 45% of government or business employees and 33% of farmers (figure 2).

Zoom In Zoom Out Reset image size

Almost half (44%; n = 677) of participants reported not having enough food to feed their families at some point while under COVID-19 restrictions (table 2). The self-reported rate of food insecurity was about 20% higher among informal sector workers (60%) compared with business owners (41%) and business or government employees (37%) (table 2).

Among food-insecure households, 69% (n = 464) indicated cooking less while under COVID-19 restrictions, compared with only 11% (n = 94) among households (n = 851) with enough food to feed their families.

Universally, a decline in food security while under COVID-19 restrictions in Langas was driven by a decline in income (100%; n = 674) (figure 3). However, 11% (n = 75) of households reported that an inability to afford the cost of cooking fuels was another reason for their food insecurity. An increase in the number of people to feed led to insufficient food among 5% (n = 33) of households. A minority of participants reported supply-related causes of food security, namely an insufficient availability of food in stores or on their farm (3%, n = 20).

Zoom In Zoom Out Reset image size

Additionally, households that reported a decline or cessation of income while under COVID-19 restrictions had 5.3 times (95% CI:[3.8, 7.4]) and 14.6 times (95% CI:[10.2, 20.9]) the odds, respectively, of experiencing food insecurity as those reporting no change in their income level (figure 4). Among households reporting reduced income during COVID-19 lockdown, increasing age was associated with a greater probability of food insecurity, and also lower cooking frequency, in a monotonically increasing manner (supplementary figure 6). Individuals aged 41 and older with reduced income during COVID-19 lockdown had twice the odds of being food insecure (odds ratio: 2.1 95% CI:[1.5, 3.1]) and cooking less frequently (odds ratio: 2.0 95% CI:[1.4, 2.8]) as those aged 18–24.

Zoom In Zoom Out Reset image size

One in five households (19%; n = 284) switched their primary cooking fuel while under COVID-19 restrictions. Among households that reported primarily cooking with LPG (n = 922), 18% (n = 164) switched to charcoal (n = 138), kerosene (n = 14) or wood (n = 12) while under COVID-19 restrictions (table 2). Participants that reported having a lower-than-usual household income more than six months due to COVID-19 restrictions had 2.1 times (95% CI:[1.2, 3.7]) the odds of switching away from LPG to a polluting primary cooking fuel as those that had reduced earnings for two months or less.

The proportion of households switching away from LPG as their primary cooking fuel also differed by the head of household's occupation (figure 5). For example, informal sector workers had a higher probability (15%) of switching away from LPG than government or business employees (11%), craftspeople (6%) and farmers (2%).

Zoom In Zoom Out Reset image size

While 12% (n = 33) of households that changed their primary cooking fuel while under COVID-19 restrictions switched from a polluting fuel to LPG (table 2), the overall prevalence of polluting primary cooking fuel use while under COVID-19 restrictions in the community increased by an estimated 9%. One-in-five households that altered their primary cooking fuel while under COVID-19 restrictions switched between different types of polluting fuels: charcoal to wood (12%; n = 35) or wood to charcoal (8%; n = 24).

After the VAT was re-introduced on LPG in July 2021, nearly nine in ten (88%; n = 815) participants using LPG as a primary (37%; n = 576) or secondary fuel (23%; n = 346) noticed an increase in the price of LPG. However, less than half (47%, n = 437) of these 815 individuals had heard about the re-introduction of the VAT at the time of the survey. Among the (n = 815) LPG users that noticed a price increase, almost half (44%; n = 356) reduced their LPG consumption. Over three quarters of these 356 households (77%; n = 276) reported cooking more frequently with polluting fuels due to the LPG price increase. One quarter (27%; n = 220) of LPG users that noticed a price increase indicated that it would affect their future decision-making on whether to discontinue using LPG.

The proportion of households with four or more family members that decreased their LPG usage due to the VAT re-introduction (56%) was 20% higher than among families of three or less (34%) (table 3). Participants aged 25 and older and those working in the informal sector also had a higher probability of reducing their LPG consumption as a result of the VAT levy than participants aged 24 and younger and those working as a government or business employee, respectively (table 3). Additionally, households with a lower number of LPG stove burners per capita (0.05–0.2 burners/capita) had 3.3 times the odds (95% CI:[2.0, 5.6]) of reducing their LPG use because of the VAT re-introduction as those with >0.5 burners/capita.

The proportion of households reducing their LPG consumption because of the VAT re-introduction was influenced by LPG supply-related factors. Two-thirds (66%) of individuals reporting that LPG was unavailable at least 4 times during the previous year used less LPG as a result of the VAT introduction, compared with only 39% of those that found LPG to always be available at the retailer (figure 6). Thus, those unable to obtain cylinder refills four or more times per year, on average, had three times the odds (95% CI:[1.5, 5.8]) of reducing their LPG consumption due to the VAT re-introduction as households that reporting consistent access to refills.

Zoom In Zoom Out Reset image size

Additionally, a lower number of LPG stove burners/capita was associated with a lower probability of reducing LPG consumption following the VAT re-introduction, in a monotonically decreasing manner (figure 6); households with <0.2 stove burners/capita had 3.3 times the odds (95% CI:[2.0, 5.6]) of reducing their consumption of LPG as those with greater than 0.5 burners/capita. Moreover, the proportion of households reporting a reduction in LPG consumption because of the VAT re-introduction increased with greater travel time to the LPG retailer (supplementary figure 7). Only 30% of participants traveling 5 min or less to the LPG retailer reported reducing their LPG consumption, compared with 50% of those traveling more than 5 min to the retailer.

A monotonically decreasing trend existed between increasing average annual per capita LPG consumption and the likelihood of reducing LPG consumption following the VAT levy (figure 7). Participants with the lowest self-reported annual per capita LPG consumption (1.5–9 kg/capita yr⁻¹) had 2.9 (95% CI:[1.9, 4.6]) times the odds of reducing their LPG consumption following the VAT re-introduction as households with the highest per capita LPG consumption (21.1–48 kg/capita yr⁻¹). Additionally, households in the lowest self-reported per capita income category (0–1499 KES/capita/month) had 1.9 (95% CI:[1.2, 3.1]) times the odds of reducing their LPG consumption following the VAT re-introduction as households in the highest per capita income group (4,000+ KES/capita/month).

Zoom In Zoom Out Reset image size

Participants most adversely impacted economically by COVID-19 restrictions were more likely to be negatively impacted by the VAT re-introduction on LPG. A higher proportion (59%) of households that switched away from LPG while under COVID-19 restrictions consumed less LPG as a result of the VAT re-introduction compared with those that maintained their use of LPG (41%). Thus, individuals switching away from LPG while under COVID-19 restrictions had three times (95% CI:[2.1, 4.3]) the odds of reducing their LPG consumption due to the VAT re-introduction as those that continued using LPG while under COVID-19 restrictions. Moreover, 57% (n = 133) of participants that reported having no income while under COVID-19 restrictions in 2020 reported a decline in available income for other goods and services, compared with only 17% (n = 33) among those not experiencing any decline in earnings while under COVID-19 restrictions (figure 8).

Zoom In Zoom Out Reset image size

Participants that reduced their cooking frequency while under COVID-19 restrictions and who did not have enough food to feed their families during this period had 6.2 times the odds (95% CI:[4.5, 8.7]) and 3.8 times the odds (95% CI:[2.8, 5.2]), respectively, of having a lower capacity to purchase other goods and services because of the increased cost of LPG (figure 8).

COVID-19 restrictions and the VAT re-introduction largely affected the same households; a much higher proportion of participants earning no income while under COVID-19 restrictions reported having less money for other goods and services due to the VAT re-introduction (57%) compared with only those not experiencing any decline in earnings while under COVID-19 restrictions (17%) (figure 8). Additionally, food-insecure participants during COVID-19 restrictions had 3.8 times the odds (95% CI:[2.8, 5.2]) of having a lower capacity to purchase other goods and services because of the increased LPG cost due to the VAT re-introduction (figure 8). These results emphasize the fragility of many families to sudden increases in household energy prices. There is therefore a need for social protection programmes that allow poorer Kenyan households to become more resilient to economic downturns.

In the absence of economic stability, the accessibility of LPG cylinder refills impacts LPG use [17, 37, 38]. This study highlights that supply-related factors also impact customers' ability to mitigate the effects of LPG price increases. For example, participants who reported an inability to purchase LPG refills at the retailer at least four times/year had three times the odds of lowering their consumption due to the VAT re-introduction as those reporting a consistent supply of cylinder refills at the retailer. Home deliveries are more commonly being offered by LPG retailers in Langas as a competitive advantage to increase their market share of customers. The convenience of home delivery in the community likely increased use of LPG for cooking (table 1). This may be attributed to the reduction in the 'refill gap' that cylinder home deliveries can provide [39]; households receiving cylinder home deliveries had a 15% lower probability of having a 1 week gap between cylinder swaps as LPG users walking to the retailer to obtain a new cylinder (36%) (supplementary figure 3).

With nearly 30% of LPG users in Langas waiting over a week before swaping their LPG cylinder (table 1), increasing cylinder home deliveries can potentially lead to substantial gains in LPG consumption [40]. In other communities in Eldoret, a similar, negative correlation between increasing travel time and decreasing LPG consumption was found [29]. Studies in India indicated some difficulties that women experience when obtaining cylinder refills due to associated travel costs or the inability to carry the heavy LPG cylinders [41]. These barriers often necessitate that women wait for their spouse to obtain the cylinder refill [42].

This study demonstrates that a higher number of LPG stove burners/capita may have helped households maintain their rates of LPG consumption during periods of economic volatility. A lower number of LPG burners/capita was associated with significantly higher odds of switching from LPG to a polluting primary cooking fuel while under COVID-19 restrictions (supplementary figure 4) and reduced LPG consumption due to the VAT re-introduction (figure 5). As average annual LPG consumption was much higher among households with >0.5 LPG burners/capita than among those with <0.5 burners/capita (supplementary figure 2), the ability to cook multiple dishes simultaneously with LPG may make families more likely to increase their consumption.

Estimated mean annual LPG per capita consumption in Langas (17.2 kg/capita yr⁻¹) was 34% greater than the average national rate (12.8 kg/capita yr⁻¹) estimated in an assessment conducted in 2017/2018 [43]. It is uncertain if the higher LPG consumption level found in Langas is due to significant geographical variation within Kenya, population-level increases in LPG consumption from 2018–2021 or possible self-reporting bias, which has occurred in previous studies [29, 44]. Nevertheless, the self-reported average LPG consumption rate in Langas is over 50% lower than the 40 kg/capita yr⁻¹ typically consumed by households in more developed countries with stronger LPG supply chains, such as Brazil, Indonesia, and Peru [17].

This study was conducted a couple of months after the VAT re-introduction on LPG in July 2021, enabling an assessment of participants' LPG consumption in response to the policy with minimal recall bias. Random sampling ensured a representative study population, facilitating community-level characterisation of the impacts of COVID-19 restrictions and VAT re-introduction. While questions about participants' experiences while under COVID-19 restrictions required a longer period of recall (i.e. up to 1.5 years), the striking effect of the pandemic on livelihoods is likely to enhance participants' memory of events. Moreover, the study findings regarding the impacts of COVID-19 restrictions on income, food security and cooking behaviours are consistent with a study we conducted in an informal settlement in Nairobi in April 2020, immediately following the mandatory stay-at-home order issued by the Kenyan government [26].

This study did not quantify the extent of the reductions in LPG use at a household level, and subsequent increase in polluting fuel use among households. More research is needed to measure declines in kilograms of LPG consumed, and also monitor household air pollution levels to better estimate the potential health and climate impacts of these policies.

This study outlines numerous downstream negative impacts of COVID-19 restrictions and the 16% VAT on LPG among families living in an informal urban settlement in western Kenya. Prolonged economic downswings caused many participants, particularly informal sector workers and lower income households, to decrease their cooking frequency and switch from LPG to polluting primary cooking fuels. The LPG price increase in 2021 due to the VAT compounded the negative effects of COVID-19 restrictions by also forcing nearly half of households to reduce their LPG consumption, with those working in the informal sector again being most affected.

These results clearly demonstrate a reversal in progress made prior to the onset of the pandemic toward increased access to clean cooking fuels in Kenya. With the Kenyan government affirming their target of countrywide clean energy access by 2030 (a key component of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 7) at COP26, reducing major setbacks in LPG usage during future economically unstable periods will likely be important for maintaining continued progress toward a rapid, equitable transition to universal clean energy access.

Firstly, the Kenyan Government should consider returning to a zero-rated VAT on LPG to remove prohibitive cost increases disproportionately felt by poorer consumers. Further, as this study uncovered how improved access to LPG can enhance users' ability to maintain its use during economic downturns, policies that expand the number of LPG retailers and lower the cost of multi-burner LPG stoves should be prioritized. Additional regulatory mechanisms should also be implemented to control LPG price fluctuations during periods of market volatility.

As participants reporting lower income for extended periods of time had a greater likelihood of switching from a clean to polluting cooking fuel, establishing broad-reaching safety net programmes, such as those implemented in South Africa [34], can help poorer households retain their use of clean cooking fuels. These programs can include services such as temporary compensation (e.g. food/vouchers, conditional cash transfers), universal one-off cash payments or microloans to informal workers that are unemployed for longer periods [45]. While the County government of Uasin-Gishu and Eldoret town did provide some families with monthly food parcels and cash transfers of $9 USD during COVID-19 restrictions, this benefit did not reach all intended households [27]. Highly coordinated social protection schemes are needed.

With fuel and food supply shortages likely to persist due to the war in Ukraine and the lingering events of COVID-19, governments can learn from the lessons of 2020 and 2021 by directing economic support to low-income households and investing in the clean energy supply chain. Doing so can lead to numerous health, climate and social co-benefits via economic empowerment [46] and reductions in household air pollution exposures [9], deforestation [10, 47], and greenhouse gas emissions [48, 49].