Social and environmental impacts of charcoal production in Liberia: Evidence from the field

Energy for Sustainable Development 47 (2018) 124–132

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy for Sustainable Development

Social and environmental impacts of charcoal production in Liberia: Evidence from the field Jose F. Alfaro ⁎, Brieland Jones School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Michigan, United States of America

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 19 September 2017 Revised 17 February 2018 Accepted 27 September 2018 Available online xxxx Keywords: Charcoal Traditional bioenergy Liberia Rural wellbeing

a b s t r a c t This work provides empirical evidence of social and environmental impacts of the production phase of charcoal in Liberia, West Africa. It helps address a gap in information for stakeholders and establishes a baseline for more focused research and interventions efforts for the country's sector. Charcoal is often perceived as a maligned part of the energy ladder, mainly due to the environmental and health effects of its end use. This fuel is generally a small part of energy policies or left out altogether. Main efforts to curtail its impacts are aimed at reducing its use. The hope is that households will move away from this fuel all together. But evidence shows that cultural preference, socio-economic factors, and flaws in the concept of the energy ladder will ensure charcoal continues to be a significant part of the energy portfolio in Sub-Saharan Africa. The production phase of the fuel has received little attention particularly when considering the large environmental and social impacts faced by producers. In Liberia, where over 90% of the urban population depends on this fuel, very little is known about the situation faced by producers and the impacts resulting from it. The research team surveyed producers in key charcoal-production areas of Liberia and interviewed stakeholders from governmental and non-profit agencies. Results show that a majority of survey respondents do not replant when harvesting for production and use traditional earth mound kilns. Child labor and physical injury were common among respondents. Gender disparities and a lack of institutional support or formalization of the industry were identified. Policies aimed at the production phase of charcoal are generally absent in the country. Further research is needed to fully understand the situation in Liberia and more engagement with producers will be key. However, these initial findings point to the need for focused attention on the production phase of the fuel and attempt to fill the gap of available data from the field. © 2018 International Energy Initiative. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Introduction The objective of this research is to identify social and environmental impacts of the production phase of charcoal. The study utilized surveys with charcoal producers and interviews with government, nongovernment and private organizations to elucidate the current impacts associated with the production phase of charcoal in Liberia, West Africa. Desktop research was used to complement the research on the ground. It has been identified that large misconceptions on the charcoal sector are prevalent due to a lack of reliable data from the ground (Mwampamba, Ghilardi, Sander, & Chaix, 2013). This paper is one step towards filling that gap. The research performed shows that charcoal is an important part of the energy portfolio, economic activity, and livelihood of rural Liberia. This points to opportunities for interventions that can curtail the impacts of charcoal production and increase the well-being of producers and stakeholders. ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (J.F. Alfaro).

Most policies to curtail the impacts of charcoal and traditional biomass-use focus on the demand side or the use phase of the fuel life cycle (Ghilardi, Mwampamba, & Dutt, 2013). In general, it is expected that reducing the demand for the fuels will in turn reduce its negative impacts. However, this ignores two important parts of the system. First, in some countries reducing demand for charcoal would eliminate a large contribution to the economy and a source of livelihood for a vast portion of the population (Mwampamba et al., 2013). The issue would largely affect rural and agricultural populations where most of the production takes place. Second, charcoal production is an important source of energy in absence of alternative affordable energy sources. It is also preferred culturally by many of the people who use it (Akpalu, Dasmani, & Aglobitse, 2011). Despite efforts to deter its end use, this fuel will continue to be a part of the fuel ladder for many countries. Between 2010 and 2016 the charcoal production in Africa grew by 12.6% and in West Africa by 14.3% (Food and Agriculture Organization, 2014) and the demand is expected to continue its increase for the next two decades (International Energy Agency, 2014). Policies that tackle the whole production chain of charcoal are necessary to integrate

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2018.09.004 0973-0826/© 2018 International Energy Initiative. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

J.F. Alfaro, B. Jones / Energy for Sustainable Development 47 (2018) 124–132

this fuel in a sustainable way to the energy matrix of consumers (Owen, van der Plas, & Sepp, 2013). This work contributes to the growing body of literature for this fuel source by shedding light on the environmental and social impacts of the production phase mainly through direct surveys with charcoal producers. This is not common due to the clandestine nature that the production often takes and the lack of formalization of the production chain in developing countries. With the results, the paper also provides evidence of the need for a focus on the production phase of the fuel. More importantly, to our knowledge, this paper is the only data collected directly from charcoal producers in Liberia to be published in academic literature. Economic importance of charcoal In most countries in SSA charcoal is left out of the formal economy (Cuvilas, Jirjis, & Lucas, 2010) but this does not mean that it's not economically important. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates charcoal production in 2014 at 53.1 Mt (Food and Agriculture Organization, 2014). The same report puts the export value of charcoal at $959 million, $107 million in Africa alone. This does not necessarily capture the total value of the charcoal industry since it is a highly informal chain. Case studies of charcoal supply chains in other Sub-Saharan countries have recognized the significant contributions of these industries to employ large numbers of both rural and urban residents who may otherwise have few employment opportunities (Minten, Sander, & Stifel, 2013; Mugo & Ong, 2006). Charcoal industries in some of the top producing countries, namely Tanzania and Uganda, employ tens to hundreds of thousands of citizens, many of whom receive up to 70% of their annual income from this market (Zulu & Richardson, 2013). This means that charcoal is a significant contributor to livelihoods especially in the rural areas where the production takes place. It is estimated that over 8% of all the wood extracted from forests worldwide is used for charcoal production generating income for 40 million people (van Dam, 2009). Social preference of charcoal Current initiatives in SSA focus on promoting electrification and more refined fuels for cooking and have their foundation in the assumptions of the traditional energy ladder model. According to this model, each rung corresponds to a particular energy source and households will resort to using only a single fuel at any one time. Evidence from many Asian countries have supported this model, recognizing that as households in urban areas of developing countries increase their annual income, the fuels utilized by the household will divert from biomass (dung, wood and charcoal) to fuels higher on the energy “ladder” (DeFries & Pandey, 2010). Recently, however, research has gained a deeper insight into these trends, particularly in SSA, and its validity is being challenged. Hosier and Dowd (1987) first identified gaps in the energy ladder hypothesis when he found that not only do economics play a role in a households' choice to switch fuels, other factors including convenience, culture, and tradition significantly influence how strictly households adhere to this trend (Hosier & Dowd, 1987). Masera, Saatkamp, and Kammen (2000) added to this body of work by finding evidence to support a “multifuel ladder”, where households may utilize several fuels at once depending on a number of factors other than cost, including resource scarcity, cultural preferences, and health impacts. This is also known in the literature as fuel-stacking. Country specific case studies began to appear in large number. In South Africa, the most electrified country on the continent, 90% of households in one study continued to utilize wood-fuels even after ten years since gaining access to electricity (Madubansi & Shackleton, 2007). Similar results were found in Ghana, Tanzania,

125

Zimbabwe, and Botswana (Prasad, 2008; Okello, Pindozzi, Faugno, & Boccia, 2013). These results point to the social importance of charcoal. The choice to continue its use is not completely tied to the economics of households but also rests on the social preferences that these households have for the fuel. Lack of focus on production phase Despite its economic, social, and cultural importance the charcoal industry remains a very informal one. Charcoal use has been associated with detrimental health and environmental impacts (United Nations Environment Programme, 2015). Policy work has been focused on alleviating threats of human health and deforestation through control of the demand side and increases in technology efficiency for the user, for example through improved cook stoves. One must differentiate the difference between health impacts at the use phase and health impacts at the production phase. Health-related impacts associated with wood fuels have traditionally focused on effects from their consumption, or the use phase. The use of traditional biomass for cooking and heating causes poor indoor air quality and respiratory problems (World Health Organization and United Nations Development Programme, 2009). It is expected that by the year 2030, premature deaths due to this type of respiratory problems will be higher than those due to malaria, tuberculosis and even HIV/AIDS for sub-Saharan Africa (International Energy Agency, 2010). Smith (2002) documented trends in respiratory illness among disproportionate numbers of women and children as a result of indoor air pollution from wood fuel combustion throughout the developing world. However, little is known about the health impacts endured by charcoal producers during extraction and production phases. For example, it is known that pyrolysis, the process utilized for the production of charcoal, releases significant amounts of gaseous by-products, including carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide and others (Pennise et al., 2001; Bailis, Ezzati, & Kammen, 2005). Rural producers are known to work within close proximity to high temperature rudimentary kilns that off-gas these toxic compounds, generating a potential risk for poisoning. In addition, use of primitive tools can lead to moderate or severe injuries, which can prove fatal in rural areas that lack access to adequate medical care. The lack of regulation in the charcoal industry creates a risk for exploitation and safety hazards (Maes & Verbist, 2012). Charcoal demand has been linked to environmental pressures that can lead to deforestation. Research shows that charcoal production leads to regional pressures on the environment and loss of forest resources (Mwampamba, 2007; Alem, Duraisamy, Legesse, Seboka, & Mitiku, 2010) affecting the well-being of rural populations. In an analysis of stakeholder opinions in Africa, 17 out 18 interviewees mentioned charcoal energy products as a key driver for deforestation (Wehkamp, Aquino, Fuss, & Reed, 2015). Charcoal production is also deeply linked to shifting cultivation, which can result in excess wood. However, it is hard to understand if shifting agriculture results in use of charcoal as a byproduct or if production of charcoal results in empty lands that are used for colonization. For example in Mozambique, charcoal and shifting cultivation, along with forest fires are considered equal drivers of deforestation (Cuvilas et al., 2010). The situation in Liberia, as will be shown later, points to charcoal as a separate driver since producers do not own the land and in general do not replant. Attempts to legally discourage charcoal production have been seen in sub-Saharan Africa before but not succeeded due to social pressures (Mwampamba et al., 2013). These attempts may only create additional livelihood pressure on rural communities, and lead to a national charcoal dichotomy and a rural-urban divide. Production of charcoal is seen as unwanted and environmentally detrimental, while its purchase and consumption are so economically, culturally and pragmatically engrained into the general lifestyle that transitions away from this fuel can be unrealistic. Urban populations depending on this fuel benefit from

126

J.F. Alfaro, B. Jones / Energy for Sustainable Development 47 (2018) 124–132

rural populations efforts, while those same efforts are being viewed as undesirable instead of as an important part of the energy matrix. This sets up opportunities for rent-seeking that puts the rural populations at a disadvantage. While some countries have transitioned away from it, charcoal production is expected to increase over the coming decades (van Dam, 2009).

Background In Liberia, West Africa, where less than 1% of the population is connected to grid electricity, 95% rely on traditional biomass fuels in the form of wood and charcoal (Goanue, 2009). In the growing urban center, Monrovia, charcoal is the primary fuel used for heating and cooking, as poor infrastructure, high cost, and low-income levels limit market growth for refined cooking fuels. A white paper on the development of the electricity sector in Liberia, where the average annual income is $454, stated that the transition away from charcoal would not be significant until this figure reaches $1500 (Africa Energy Unit, 2011). Other global work suggests that this transition to cleaner cooking fuels and facilities will not occur until annual income is between $3650 and $18,250 (Rosling, 2007). A significant dependence on charcoal is expected in the near future (Gallego Carrera & Mack, 2010). Two organizations that are highly involved with the Liberian Charcoal market are the Liberian Environmental Protection Agency (LEPA) and the National Charcoal Union of Liberia (NACUL). The NACUL is a national organization that seeks to organize charcoal producers in the country and conduct independent research of the industry. At present, it has 600 members, according to direct consultations with the organization's leadership. While its social media communication mentions being an advocacy group for charcoal producers, most of its members are charcoal sellers in and around Monrovia. According to consumption levels and current market price reported by NACUL, charcoal accounts for over $16M annually in gross domestic product (GDP), while grid connected electricity accounts only for $8M (Africa Energy Unit, 2011). The contribution is probably larger as the data provided by NACUL is limited. The NACUL estimates that charcoal production is 36,500 tons annually, but their figure has not changed in several years. This is dwarfed by FAO estimates, which place the yearly production in Liberia for 2013 at 261,700 tons (Food and Agriculture Organization, 2014). Using the same cost data from the NACUL to value the FAO estimate, this represents $114M annually. FAO data is far more reliable as they depend on reporting provided by the government while the NACUL is a not-for-profit organization with limited membership and capacity to conduct research. There is little policy or institutional engagement with the production phase of charcoal in Liberia. The LEPA and similar organizations focus heavily on the environmental impacts of charcoal on forested areas, as Liberia sits squarely on 40% of the remaining Upper Guinean Rainforest, a global biodiversity hotspot (Conservation International, 2007). The organizations mentioned tend to tackle the issue through end use interventions, such as the introduction of cook stoves. However, as the results will show later, little interaction with charcoal producers is happening and opportunities for improving the sustainability of the fuel and decrease deforestation are available which have not been pursued.

Methods In this work two methods of data collection were utilized; stakeholder interviews with officials from multiple government agencies, NGOs and private firms, and survey questionnaires administered to charcoal producers in rural areas. The data collection was complemented with desktop research.

Stakeholder interviews Interviews were requested with heads of multiple organizations and agencies directly or indirectly affected by operations in the charcoal sector. The organizations interviewed can be seen in Table 1. Organizations were identified through published research and recommendations from other interviewees. Organizational perspectives were gained through discussion of topics in the context of charcoal, including: organizational roles in, and perceptions of, charcoal production and use, environmental protection, social development, current initiatives intended to mitigate negative effects, and perceived energy futures. Community surveys One hundred sixty surveys (n = 160, 128 men, 36 women) were administered to charcoal producers in four counties in Liberia. Counties were selected according to information gathered from organizational interviews. The counties included can be seen in Fig. 1. Pre-determined sample sizes were difficult to obtain given the informal nature of production and lack of available information on producer demographics. This work used a snowball method, where subsequent respondents referred the research team to other potential respondents. Surveys were conducted generally along roadside villages as most charcoal production occurs in these places. Qualitative and quantitative data was collected through oral administration of surveys. Six Liberian university students formed part of the research team. Their contributions were invaluable to navigate language barriers, as well as geographic and cultural knowledge. Each student was trained in research methods and basic survey administration prior to conducting surveys on the field. A copy of the survey instrument can be seen in the Supplementary information. Data analysis For the majority of data collected, the use of Chi-Square Contingency tables was most appropriate. Where quantitative data was collected, such as selling price, income generation and quantity of bags produced per kiln, two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was utilized. Contingency tables and ANOVA tests were performed in R statistical package. An alpha level of significance of 0.05 was used for all tests. Results Survey results provide a series of metrics that allow us to understand the environmental and social implications of the production use phase in Liberia. Table 2 shows results of the survey that correspond to producers' choice between cutting or harvesting fell wood, replanting harvested wood, choice of technology, and the cooking fuel they use in their own home. A majority of producers actively cut wood to produce charcoal. Margibi county is the only area where the practice is lower with statistical significance. Over 25% of respondents in Margibi collect wood that has already fallen instead of actively cutting it. All respondents interviewed use traditional earth mound kilns for their production. Table 1 Organizations interviewed. Organization

Sector

Liberian Environmental Protection Agency United Nations Development Programme Ministry of Land, Mines and Energy Conservation International Center for Sustainable Energy Technology National Charcoal Union of Liberia Buchanan Renewables

Government Government Government Non-government Non-government Non-government Private

J.F. Alfaro, B. Jones / Energy for Sustainable Development 47 (2018) 124–132

127

Fig. 1. Political map of Liberia showing the study areas in blue. Bomi, Bong, Grand Bassa and Margibi counties were suggested by government officials who perceive them as the counties that produce the highest quantities of charcoal or are most environmentally impacted by charcoal operations. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

The majority of producers do not replant after harvesting. The only area where this practice is significantly lower is in Grand Bassa where up to 37% of respondents replant. Despite all respondents being charcoal producers, their fuel of choice is most likely something other than charcoal. Margibi county is an exception where 31% of respondents use charcoal as their primary fuel. Table 3 shows the type of land used for production in each county. This table shows that a majority of respondents in each county use

private land. Private land refers to land that is owned by an individual although the producer is not necessarily the owner. Public land refers to community land as understood by the traditional arrangements in Liberia and not necessarily to lands owned by the central government. Table 4 shows a summary of social indicators gathered during the surveys. Table 5 shows education and employment of respondents by gender while Table 6 shows selling price of reported by gender and by county. There is a clear educational gender divide in the data.

Table 2 Conversion practices and personal fuel use of respondents.

Discussion

Percent (%) of respondents by county

Active cutting Replanting Earth mound kiln Primary fuel used

a

Wood Charcoal Other

Bomi

Bong

Grand Bassa

Margibi

88.3 9 100 37 19a 44

92.6 22 100 81 0 19

94.7 37a 100 82 3 15

74.6a 22 100 62 31a 7

Indicates significant differences among respondents (through Chi-Square).

Environmental issues The main environmental concerns identified from the production phase in Liberia are the use of traditional kilns, which tend to produce Table 4 Social indicators gathered during the survey.

Table 3 Land used for charcoal production. Percent (%) of respondents by county

Public land Private land Unknown ownership

In this section, we discuss the importance of the results to the Liberian situation and point to areas of learning that can be transferred to other regions. The results are divided in environmental, and social issues.

Bomi

Bong

Grand Bassa

Margibi

28 65 7

4 96 0

26 71 3

13 85 2

Indicator

Percent (%) of respondents

n

Physical injury Sickness Engagement of children in production Interaction with government or non-government officials NACUL affiliates

75 22 57.1 1.82%

124 36 94 3

0

0

128

J.F. Alfaro, B. Jones / Energy for Sustainable Development 47 (2018) 124–132

Table 5 Education and employment indicators.

Education p b .0005

Employment

Category

Male % (n)

Female % (n)

None Primary Middle High school University None Farmer Trade Motorbike

24 (31) 38 (48) 3 (4) 31 (40) 3 (4) 14 (18) 51 (64) 25 (32) 7 (9)

61 (22) 31 (11) 0 8 (3) 0 14 (5) 83 (30) 3 (1) 0

higher greenhouse gas emissions and the lack of replanting after harvesting and production. All respondents utilized traditional earth-mound kilns, which are constructed with organic materials (i.e. dirt, shrubs and grasses). This production technology is highly inefficient and releases significant amounts of greenhouse gas emissions. Efficiencies have been reported from as low as 8% (World Bank, 2009) to as high as 20% (Stockholm Development Institute, 2002). Shifting to improved technologies can increase efficiency and reduce greenhouse gases. Average improvements in mas conversion efficiency have been determined at 14% through a literature review (Zorrilla-Miras et al., 2018) while a study of kilns in Kenya and Brazil found reduction of greenhouse gases of 43% (Pennise et al., 2001). Improved technologies depend on the right conditions being available for their use. However, given these conditions they represent a significant improvement to the environmental impacts of the production phase and possible economic benefits to the producers. At a minimum, most of these improved technologies would require a concentrated source of wood, making them perfect for areas around rubber plantations and other operations that conduct regular trimmings and replanting. However, producer cooperatives and other arrangements may be formed to introduce these kilns. There was no evidence in Liberia of working interventions that would help producers transition to a different technology. Despite Liberia's vast biomass resources, the surveys suggest that extraction for charcoal is being done unsustainably. Table 2 shows that the vast majority of producers do not replant even though they actively harvest trees. Not replanting significantly increases the greenhouse gas impacts of production. A study of earth mound kilns in Brazil and Kenya found an increase in the total global warming potential of charcoal from 1.89 kg of CO2eq per kg of charcoal made to 2.58 kg of CO2eq over a 20 year time horizon (Pennise et al., 2001). Replanting has greater than zero impacts due to carbon conversion to methane, which has a larger global warming impact than CO2. A life-cycle assessment effort by the FAO shows much broader differences ranging from 0.531 CO2eq per kg of charcoal when recycling all CO2 to 9.8 kg of CO2eq per kg of charcoal made if not replanting or recycling the CO2 (Pennise et al., 2001). Three main land access arrangements are seen in Liberia, deed ownership, traditional ownership, and squatting (Republic of Liberia and Ministry of Agriculture, 2007). Traditional ownership does not provide Table 6 Reported selling price of charcoal and bags produced per kiln. Factor

Income per bag sold ($LD)

p-Value

Bags per kiln

Men Women Bomi Bong Grand Bassa Margibi

179.5 173.5 170.3 176.6 200.4 184.5

p b .05

105 64

p b .005

The exchange rate for $LD to $USD is highly variable, though is stabilized within a range of $LD70–76 per 1 $USD.

a deed and leaves owners with higher land tenure insecurity. Land ownership is a policy challenge that has been identified in Liberia and in other areas of Sub-Saharan Africa (Wehkamp et al., 2015; Republic of Liberia and Ministry of Agriculture, 2007). In 2006 only 66% of Liberians had access to land and only 20% of those had an actual deed (Republic of Liberia and Ministry of Agriculture, 2007). When asked why they do not replant, producers often express that they are harvesting trees on property that they do not own. Because of that they feel it is not their place to replant on the land. Doing so could be seen as an ownership claim that the producer is making and may lead to legal trouble. It is unclear why producers feel it is acceptable to harvest trees from these lands even though they do not own them. Some differences among counties were observed. A significant number of respondents in Margibi county (X2 = 10.18, p = .012) collect wood from felled trees instead of actively harvesting trees. Many respondents in Margibi reside in, or near, Firestone Rubber Plantation, one of the largest in the region. These respondents utilized significant amounts of scrap rubber wood from organizations that were removing dead rubber trees and from trimming waste from the plantation operations (Fig. 2). This points to a good opportunity for policy to increase the sustainability of both the rubber plantation and the charcoal production. Rubber plantations have a significant amount of trimming and waste that can be used for charcoal production ensuring that the charcoal comes from renewable wood resources and not contributing to deforestation. This is also true of other cash crops, like oil palm. It is estimated that with a conservative 10% replanting rate in the country, the residues from rubber alone amount to 254,000 dry tons per year (Milbrandt, 2009). Oil palm would provide 240,000 and coconut another 7776 dry tons per year (Milbrandt, 2009). Industrial plantations could be incentivized to move their residues for charcoal producers, so that charcoal can be made from these residues without active harvesting. Respondents in Grand Bassa county are much more likely to replant trees (X2 = 8.89, p = .030) compared to those in other counties, perhaps due to collaboration with certain development organizations (discussed in the next section). Significant number of respondents in Grand Bassa and Bomi counties reported that they produced charcoal on community-owned land (X2 = 13.28, p = .038). This is different to the other counties where a majority of land used is privately held. Social impacts Primary social concerns found are the high degree of public health and safety issues that the sector faces, including a large number of producers engaging children in the work. The industry suffers from low institutional and government support creating a disconnect between producers and the rest of the supply chain. The industry also faces a gender divide where women tend to be at a disadvantage. Finally, as in other countries, a rural-urban divide is present showing that a majority of rural producers use fire wood instead of charcoal pointing to a large export of charcoal to urban areas. Public health and safety The use of axes and chainsaws, combined with heavy lifting, extremely high temperatures and lack of safety training create unsafe working conditions. There was a 75% injury rate among all respondents. Common injuries among affected individuals were moderate to severe lacerations and burns of the lower extremities. Lack of adequate treatment often limits participation in income generating activities for an extended time, usually due to infection and vulnerability to other hazards. In three separate instances, respondents reported the death of a colleague due to these working hazards. The majority of women expressed that they felt dizzy, lightheaded and nauseated while, and for some time after, engaging in production tasks. There are many conditions that could cause these symptoms including dehydration, hunger and physical exhaustion. Another

J.F. Alfaro, B. Jones / Energy for Sustainable Development 47 (2018) 124–132

129

Fig. 2. Large rubber wood branches left behind by Buchanan Renewables operations are utilized by local residents to produce charcoal (man standing on kiln in background) at a Firestone plantation. While rubber wood is not as preferred as forest wood by locals, high resource availability and accessibility far outweigh preference in this case.

explanation could be carbon monoxide exposure, which raises significant concerns for women and children's health. Numerous health studies provide documentation of the symptoms of carbon monoxide poisoning, which mirror those expressed by female producers (Hampson, Kramer, Dunford, & Norkool, 1994). Chronic exposure can have significant impacts on children and mothers affecting cerebral development, maternal health, and birth weights (Salam et al., 2005). Men did not mention these symptoms, perhaps due to the division of labor along gender lines that was mentioned anecdotally. Women are often in charge of collecting and packaging the charcoal after the firing process is done, putting them in contact with the kilns for an extended period of time (Fig. 3). Men on the other hand tend to be in charge of collecting the wood, assembling the kilns, and doing the initial

firing. It is possible that these tasks provide less exposure. Further research is required to investigate these symptoms, in particular due to the high prevalence of women and children working on the production of charcoal. Children's engagement The engagement of children among the communities visited seems to be common with 57.1% of respondents expressing children routinely assist in the production phase. While children typically engage in less physically intensive processes (sorting and packing), they are by no means safe from serious health risks. Inhalation of toxic gases, like carbon monoxide, in young children is often more detrimental to healthy physical and mental development (Prockop & Chichkova, 2007). Engaging in production processes limits children's time spent

Fig. 3. Women working in direct contact with kilns that could be releasing toxic gases. Charcoal production tasks are often segregated by gender. Women collect the charcoal after the firing is complete and package it with no safety precautions.

130

J.F. Alfaro, B. Jones / Energy for Sustainable Development 47 (2018) 124–132

in primary and secondary school in areas where education rates are already low.

Lack of institutional support and capacity building The role that more formalized parties play, like government and non-governmental organizations and aid agencies, influence the impacts sustained by charcoal producing communities and individuals. Interviews with officials from the LEPA, United Nations Development Programme, and Conservation International all confirmed common challenges that plague most developing nations attempting to address such a complex and far-reaching issue. There is too little data and too few resources to initiate a shift in how government and aid agencies' approach them. According to the interviews, to date, most of the efforts have been directed at urban cook stove programs, similar to other countries. Government and aid officials often suggest that end-user efforts are most feasible given the destruction of forest resources in unregulated rural areas. All officials interviewed confirmed the use of transportation and consumption data collected by the National Charcoal Union of Liberia. NACUL is a not for profit organization of charcoal producers and serves as the sole advocate for charcoal producers in the country regarding fair wages, market access and research, and sustainable development of the industry. The same figure, 36,500 tons per year, has been reported consistently over the past several years by NACUL. As mentioned earlier this is a stark contrast to FAO estimates. The significant discrepancy between these figures and lack of new data suggest that a collective approach should be taken in gathering accurate production and sales information as one of the first steps in including charcoal in the energy policy in the country. Most NACUL members are involved in the selling of charcoal products within urban and peri-urban areas of Liberia's capital city, Monrovia. Limited resources prevent NACUL from expanding into other sectors of the supply chain, particularly into more rural areas. No charcoal producers participating in this survey were current members of NACUL or had they been approached by any NACUL affiliate. Similarly, all but three respondents had not had prior interaction with any NGOs or aid agencies regarding issues related to charcoal production.

All three respondents who confirmed prior interaction with NGOs were located within Grand Bassa County. The Center for Sustainable Energy Technology (CSET) provides support related to outreach and installation of sustainable energy technologies. Interviews with the organization confirmed that they provide significant support to one particular community in Grand Bassa County in the form of a highefficiency prototype kiln (Fig. 4). In addition, workshops were held to inform the community of current issues threatening the industry. Overall in Grand Bassa, replanting rates were higher and choice of wood depended on availability rather than preference when compared to the other counties. This may suggest that NGO intervention plays a positive resource management role in the community.

Gender divide The common trend of gender inequality found in both urban and rural areas of developing countries is supported with respondent data. Both educational and income generating opportunities are crucial for rural development in general, but particularly for women and young girls. In terms of education, 61% of women had received no education compared to 24% of men. In each educational category thereafter, male educational attainment was significantly higher compared to females (p b .0005). In addition, 97% of women were either not employed (14%) or worked as subsistence farmers (83%). For males, 14% identified as unemployed while 50% expressed they were working as subsistence farmers. No females held trade positions (carpenter, electrician, etc.) while 25% of males did. No females held higher education while only 3% of males did. It is important to clarify that respondents considered employment as an arrangement that provides a regular source of income. Therefore, even if they were engaged in charcoal production many did not see that as their primary income and identified themselves as unemployed. Males receive higher income and are able to produce more when compared to females. Men receive in general 3% higher selling prices than women and report producing far more bags per kiln. Males, therefore, are able to create more product in less time and garner 70% more income for each kiln. This may be due to males being much more likely than women to rent chainsaws (“powersaw”) for

Fig. 4. High efficiency kiln in Grand Bassa County. Initially installed by CSET the tragic death of the designer resulted in low acceptance of the technology. No data had been collected while the unit operated and it currently sits idle.

J.F. Alfaro, B. Jones / Energy for Sustainable Development 47 (2018) 124–132

commercial production, possibly due to their higher earnings and social networks within, and outside, the community. Further differences in income generation by county suggest a need for more research on the true determinants of market price, especially given differences in production volume. Rural-urban divide The data gathered shows that despite charcoal being produced in rural populations the majority of producers do not use it. The majority of the charcoal is being “exported” to urban areas. Considering that all respondents were from rural populations, 63.2% prefer to use wood as a cooking fuel, often because it is cheap and widely available. This means that charcoal producers are generally using a lower quality fuel, which results in higher particulate matter and is less energy dense. However, cost and not energy density may be the main concern for these populations as fuel wood can be perceived as free. Conclusions Liberians have a high dependence on charcoal as a source of cooking fuel and this is not expected to change for the foreseeable future. Charcoal production in Liberia is a valuable part of the economy. In 2005 charcoal and fuelwood represented 11% of the GDP (Republic of Liberia and Ministry of Agriculture, 2007) and, although data is uncertain, rough calculations done by the authors put it at 6% in 2013. Further, the country is endowed with a large amount of biomass residues that can be tapped for transforming the charcoal industry into a more sustainable enterprise. Charcoal production has significant environmental and social impacts. However, there are opportunities for interventions that can reduce the impacts associated with the production phase and integrate the charcoal industry into a more formal part of the Liberian economy. Table 7 shows the main findings for the production phase impacts and summarizes some interventions that could support a transformation. There are two main environmental concerns in the production phase, the use of traditional technology with very low efficiency of production and high greenhouse gas emissions, and the tendency of producers to harvest wood without replanting. The production phase has the largest contribution to greenhouse gas emissions on a per mass of wood basis even when compared to the use phase with inefficient stoves (van Dam, 2009; Kammen & Lew, 2005). Existing technologies can reduce greenhouse gases and increase efficiency, if they are tied to comprehensive interventions that include the use of residues or promote installations in areas of high fuel source concentration. To alleviate replanting issues interventions could tap into the abundant biomass resources in Liberia. The presence of the rubber industry alone provides a significant renewable source for charcoal and other bioenergy options. Social programs could be implemented that encourage the use of residues from cash crops and other industries for the production of charcoal, such as the introduction of cooperatives. The use of these residues in high efficiency kilns could further reduce global warming impacts in a 20 year horizon even when compared to decomposition on the field, composting or landfilling (Morris, 2008). A Brazilian designed

131

square furnace with tar recovery can get emissions as low as 0.59 kg of CO2 per kg of charcoal produced and increase efficiency of production (Pennise et al., 2001). The result would be a higher productivity alleviating pressures on forests and an increase in well-being through improved earnings and safety for the rural producers while creating a circular economy that benefits from the use of the residues. Socially there are four main impacts identified: high concerns of human health including exposure to toxic gases and high level of accidents; large incidence of child labor; a gender divide that results in women making less per bag and reporting health effects not reported by men. These are exacerbated by the lack of institutional support, recognition, and focused policy for the charcoal industry. Increasing the institutional support of government and other NGOs may alleviate some of social impacts of charcoal production. Policies that support the expansion of work by NGO's such as NACUL and CSET would improve human capacity and education while improving the understanding of an important informal industry. Programs can be expanded to include health and safety education, market access opportunities, and cooperative working arrangements that may reduce gender disparities and accident rates. Current practice in SSA, as in Liberia, suggests a duality of charcoal regulation, where charcoal production in rural areas is often seen as a problem but the urban populations rely on this fuel and it has become an integral part of the economy. Including a clear plan and policy package for the charcoal industry in the national energy policy, tied to outreach efforts with the producers, can alleviate this issue. Revenues may be increased through the formalization of the industry while at the same time increasing the protection of forest resources and the well-being of rural populations which house the majority of the poor and informally employed. In short, the charcoal production phase in Liberia presents a great opportunity for interventions that can increase well-being of rural populations, environmental sustainability, and the overall economy of the country. With appropriate policies and formalization efforts, the charcoal industry could catch up to the situation in developed countries. There, the industry is a complex supply chain capable of mitigating its environmental and social impacts while contributing significantly to the economy (Owen et al., 2013). Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the students of the University of Liberia who worked as enumerators for this project. Their contributions were invaluable for the implementation of the survey instrument. We would also like to thank the organizations in Liberia that opened their doors and thoughts for this paper and most importantly the men and women who participated in the survey giving us a window into their lives. Appendix A. Survey Instrument Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. org/10.1016/j.esd.2018.09.004.

Table 7 Impacts of charcoal production phase and possible interventions. Impact

Impact type

Possible interventions

Low efficiency of production Low rates of replanting Human health concerns (toxicity, working accidents) Child labor Gender divide Urban-rural divide

Environmental Environmental Social Social Social Social

Lack of recognition and policy for the industry

Institutional

Introduce and incentivize technologies that increase efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas impacts. Tap into the biomass residues of cash and food crops for a more sustainable source of feedstock. Increase engagement of NGO's and government organizations through education and outreach programs. These can be tied to the introduction of new technologies and formation of community coop's. Formalize the industry in the national policy package recognizing the urban need for fuel and acknowledging the important role of the rural populations that supply that need. Develop policy interventions (those recommended here and others) in collaboration with NGO's, community leadership, and local governments.

132

J.F. Alfaro, B. Jones / Energy for Sustainable Development 47 (2018) 124–132

References Africa Energy Unit (2011). Options for the development of Liberia's energy sector. (Washington, DC). Akpalu, W., Dasmani, I., & Aglobitse, P. B. (2011). Demand for cooking fuels in a developing country: To what extent do taste and preferences matter? Energy Policy, 39(10), 6525–6531. Alem, S., Duraisamy, J., Legesse, E., Seboka, Y., & Mitiku, E. (2010). Wood charcoal supply to Addis Ababa City and its effect on the environment. Energy & Environment, 21(6), 601–609. Bailis, R., Ezzati, M., & Kammen, D. M. (Apr. 2005). Mortality and greenhouse gas impacts of biomass and petroleum energy futures in Africa. Science, 98, 308. Conservation International (2007). Biodiversity hotspots. Retrieved from http://www. conservation.org/where/priority_areas/hotspots/africa/Guinean-Forests-of-WestAfrica/Pages/default.aspx, Accessed date: 7 January 2011 (Online). Cuvilas, C. A., Jirjis, R., & Lucas, C. (Sep. 2010). Energy situation in Mozambique: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(7), 2139–2146. van Dam, J. (2009). The charcoal transition: greening the charcoal value chain to mitigate climate change and improve local livelihoods. (Rome). DeFries, R., & Pandey, D. (2010). Urbanization, the energy ladder and forest transitions in India's emerging economy. Land Use Policy, 27(2), 130–138. Food and Agriculture Organization (2014). Forestry production and trade. Retrieved from FAOStat http://faostat3.fao.org/download/F/FO/E, Accessed date: 2 December 2018 (Online). Gallego Carrera, D., & Mack, A. (Feb. 2010). Sustainability assessment of energy technologies via social indicators: Results of a survey among European energy experts. Energy Policy, 38(2), 1030–1039. Ghilardi, A. A., Mwampamba, T., & Dutt, G. (2013). What role will charcoal play in the coming decades? Insights from up-to-date findings and reviews. Energy for Sustainable Development, 17(2), 73–74. Goanue, A. V. (2009). Status of renewable energy in Liberia. Assessment. Hampson, N. B., Kramer, C. C., Dunford, R. G., & Norkool, D. M. (1994). Carbon monoxide poisoning from indoor burning of charcoal briquets. JAMA, 271(1), 52–53. Hosier, R. H., & Dowd, J. (1987). Household fuel choice in Zimbabwe. Resources and Energy, 9, 347–361. International Energy Agency (2010). Energy poverty: How to make modern energy access universal? (Paris). International Energy Agency (2014). Africa energy outlook: A focus on energy prospects in Sub-Saharan Africa. World energy outlook special report (Paris). Kammen, D. M., & Lew, D. J. (2005). Review of technologies for the production and use of charcoal. (Berkeley, CA). Madubansi, M., & Shackleton, C. M. (Jun. 2007). Changes in fuelwood use and selection following electrification in the Bushbuckridge lowveld, South Africa. Journal of Environmental Management, 83(4), 416–426. Maes, W. H., & Verbist, B. (Aug. 2012). Increasing the sustainability of household cooking in developing countries: Policy implications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(6), 4204–4221. Masera, O. R., Saatkamp, B. D., & Kammen, D. M. (Dec. 2000). From linear fuel switching to multiple cooking strategies: A critique and alternative to the energy ladder model. World Development, 28(12), 2083–2103. Milbrandt, A. (2009). Assessment of biomass resources in Liberia. (Golden, Colorado).

Minten, B., Sander, K., & Stifel, D. (Apr. 2013). Forest management and economic rents: Evidence from the charcoal trade in Madagascar. Energy for Sustainable Development, 17(2), 106–115. Morris, G. (2008). Bioenergy and greenhouse gases. (Berkeley, CA). Mugo, F., & Ong, C. (2006). Lessons from eastern Africa's unsustainable charcoal business. 20. (Nairobi). Mwampamba, T. H. (Aug. 2007). Has the woodfuel crisis returned? Urban charcoal consumption in Tanzania and its implications to present and future forest availability. Energy Policy, 35(8), 4221–4234. Mwampamba, T. H., Ghilardi, A. A., Sander, K., & Chaix, K. J. (2013). Dispelling common misconceptions to improve attitudes and policy outlook on charcoal in developing countries. Energy for Sustainable Development, 17(2), 75–85. Okello, C., Pindozzi, S., Faugno, S., & Boccia, L. (Feb. 2013). Development of bioenergy technologies in Uganda: A review of progress. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 18, 55–63. Owen, M., van der Plas, R., & Sepp, S. (2013). Can there be energy policy in Sub-Saharan Africa without biomass? Energy for Sustainable Development, 17(2), 146–152. Pennise, D. M., Smith, K. R., Kithinji, J. P., Rezende, M. E., Raad, T. J., Zhang, J., et al. (2001). Emissions of greenhouse gases and other airborne pollutants from charcoal making in Kenya and Brazil. Journal of Geophysical Research, 106(D20), 24143–24156. Prasad, G. (Aug. 2008). Energy sector reform, energy transitions and the poor in Africa. Energy Policy, 36(8), 2806–2811. Prockop, L., & Chichkova, R. (2007). Carbon monoxide intoxication: An updated review. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 262(1), 122–130. Republic of Liberia and Ministry of Agriculture (2007). Comprehensive assessment of the agriculture sector. Rosling, H. (2007). Hans Rosling's new insights on poverty. Monterrey, CA: TED Talks. Salam, M. T., Millstein, J., Li, Y. F., Lurmann, F. W., Margolis, H. G., & Gilliland, F. D. (2005). Birth outcomes and prenatal exposure to ozone, carbon monoxide, and particulate matter: Results from the children's health study. Environmental Health Perspectives, 113(11), 1638–1644. Smith, K. R. (Sep. 2002). Indoor air pollution in developing countries: Recommendations for research. Indoor Air, 12(3), 198–207. Stockholm Development Institute (2002). Charcoal potential in Southern Africa CHAPOSA. United Nations Environment Programme (2015). Traditional use of biomass. Retrieved from http://www.unep.org/climatechange/mitigation/Bioenergy/Issues/Traditiona luseofBiomass/tabid/29473/Default.aspx, Accessed date: 1 January 2015 (Online). Wehkamp, J., Aquino, A., Fuss, S., & Reed, E. W. (2015). Analyzing the perception of deforestation drivers by African policy makers in light of possible REDD+ policy responses. Forest Policy and Economics, 59, 7–18. World Bank (2009). Environmental crisis or sustainable development opportunity? Transforming the charcoal sector in Tanzania. (Washington, D.C.). World Health Organization and United Nations Development Programme (2009). The energy access situation in developing countries: A review focusing on the least developed countries and sub-Saharan Africa. (New York). Zorrilla-Miras, P., Mahamane, M., Metzger, M. J., Baumert, S., Vollmer, F., Luz, A. C., et al. (2018). Environmental conservation and social benefits of charcoal production in Mozambique. Ecological Economics, 144(October 2016), 100–111. Zulu, L. C., & Richardson, R. B. (Apr. 2013). Charcoal, livelihoods, and poverty reduction: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. Energy for Sustainable Development, 17(2), 127–137.