There are strong incentives for influential actors to support LPG expansion, but this is not the case for the poorest household energy users. There is a broad consensus among powerful state, donor and market actors that large-scale private-sector investment in LPG infrastructure is the way to expand clean-cooking access across Nigeria.
This consensus is reflective of the prevailing state–market–donor neoliberal complex in development, which relies on the market for the efficient allocation of resources, regardless of whether and how redistribution occurs among those at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder. The political and economic incentives for investing in LPG are clear for these key actors; however, they are less clear for poor households across the country that rely overwhelmingly on biomass to meet their cooking-energy needs. This, therefore, necessitates a parallel policy focus on sustainable biomass use. The state needs to mediate between investors’ expectations of energy markets and the economic realities of poor households.
In keeping with the neoliberal complex described above, donor and state actors expect that the benefits of a market-led approach to clean-cooking expansion will trickle down to the poorest households over time, as risks to investors reduce and economies of scale increase. However, learnings from past household-energy interventions globally give reason to question this rationale and advocate a more active role for the state in enabling access by poorer households.
Even if full-fledged subsidies for cooking energy will not be politically or economically viable in the context, the onus remains on the state to put mechanisms in place to shield the most vulnerable households from the worst impacts of market failures. This is especially applicable under the current LPG-expansion regime, where the emphasis on industrialisation puts households with lower purchasing power at risk of being marginalised unless proactive measures are taken to cater to their cooking-energy needs. State institutional capacity needs to be strengthened horizontally – but also vertically, to promote accountability at the local level. In addition to flexible delivery models, strong institutional mechanisms are important for the success of clean-cooking programmes.
