A case study of improved cook stoves in primate conservation from Democratic Republic of Congo

Abstract

Human communities living near nonhuman primate habitats often depend on wood from forests for their energy needs. Improving the efficiency of local cook stoves is a potential “win‐win” solution that is commonly promoted to protect forests and improve human health and development. Despite the popularity of improved stove projects in primate conservation, few outcomes have been formally published. As a result, it is currently unclear whether this approach is a wise investment of limited conservation funds. This paper describes a pilot study conducted by the Gorilla Rehabilitation and Conservation Education Center to evaluate the potential for using improved stoves for the conservation of an important habitat for Grauer's gorillas and chimpanzees in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Community surveys and observations of human forest use revealed a heavy local reliance on forest‐derived wood. Wood was the main source of fuel used in households, the most highly valued forest resource, and the primary resource extracted during forest observations. It was primarily collected by women and children. The use of traditional, inefficient three‐stone hearths for cooking was also widespread. A 2‐year campaign using a community‐based social marketing approach resulted in an increase in improved stove installations from 18% to 78% of households in one village. After stove adoption, weekly household wood consumption was reduced by half. Campaign elements that showed promise include promotion using women's networks and intensive follow‐up assessment and support. We conclude that, if scaled up, improved stoves may be a useful strategy for reducing encroachment into our target protected area but that successful implementation will require a significant long‐term commitment with evaluation and oversight. It is recommended that before investing in improved stoves, primate conservation projects take long‐term and evaluation requirements into consideration.

Improved household living standards can restore dry tropical forests

“…Three statistical methods collectively provide strong evidence that alternative energy for cooking is associated with reduced forest degradation. Similar impacts of clean cook stoves have been found, for example, in the Indian state of Karnataka (Agarwala et al, 2017) and the Democratic Republic of Congo (Kahlenberg et al, 2020), but most studies focus on health rather than environmental impacts (Jeuland et al, 2021).…”

Best practices are never best: Evaluating primate conservation education programs (PCEPs) with a decolonial perspective

“…PCEPs and conservation initiatives often have major goals of building natural capital (biodiversity), social capital (e.g., values, sense of place), human capital (knowledge, skills), and economic capital (financial) (Balestri et al, 2017; Chancellor et al, 2021; Moore et al, 2006), rather than simply aiming to change behavior. It is evident that many PCEPs incentivize learners by providing technologies (e.g., fuel‐efficient stoves), teaching/learning materials, employment opportunities, artisan opportunities, etc., but few publications provided details about costs, longevity, or challenges with providing incentives (Dolins et al, 2010; Kahlenberg et al, 2021; Kendall et al, 2021; Patel et al, 2005). After reviewing the publications and websites, we were left with the burning questions of “how did you make this happen and what went wrong?” If we are to emerge from our current extinction and conservation crises, we must move forward with the deep knowledge of the creation and growth of the longer‐term programs and the challenges faced at a much deeper level.…”

“…In some circumstances, a PCEP may focus on sustainable development and therefore may center on the local citizens who are most likely to engage in the new behaviors. For example, two PCEPs targeted women because they are the sole user of the fuel‐efficient stoves (FES) that the educators were providing to reduce the cutting of trees (Kahlenberg et al, 2021). Kendall et al (2021) also provided FESs, but the training targets were the local teachers due to evidence that teacher trainings require fewer education resources to be distributed while having the potential to reach many citizens (Kendall et al, 2021).…”

Assessing the Demand for Improved Cook Stoves among Low Income Households in Kenya: Case of Baringo and West Pokot Counties

“…The reliance on solid biomass for cooking is a deep-rooted practice for over a third of the world's population (approximately 2.8 billion people), especially in the Low and Middle Income Countries (Stanistreet et al, 2021;Maré & M'rithaa, 2021;Kahlenberg et al, 2021;Kyayesimira & Muheirwe, 2021). Combustion of the solid biomass fuels (wood, charcoal, dung, coal, and crop residues) leads to the emission of black carbon and other greenhouse gases accentuating climate change through forest degradation and deforestation (International Energy Agency (IEA), 2014).…”

“…Essentially, the slow progress in the uptake of designed ICS has been tied to the inability to tailor designs that are capable of suiting end-user customs and preferences of cooking culturally vital food types (Robinson et al, 2022;Clifford et al, 2022). Last but not least, ICS technologies often target to benefit women and girls who are primarily engaged in fuel collection and exposure to smoke, yet these categories have limited decision making power in low resource households (Maré & DOI: 10.4236/me.2022.138060 1142 Modern Economy M'rithaa, 2021; Kahlenberg et al, 2021;Kyayesimira & Muheirwe, 2021;Stanistreet et al, 2021).…”