It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The transition towards advanced residential energy sources is a pressing priority for many countries. Despite this, solid fuels remain the dominant form of cooking energy for rural households in developing countries. This study investigates the physical and mental health impacts of cooking energy choices by using endogenous switching models to address selection bias associated with cooking energy adoption and to distinguish the health impacts of different types of cooking energy. Using country-representative household survey data from rural China, our results indicate that adopting advanced forms of energy, not only enhances physical health in terms of reducing the rates of chronic diseases but also improves mental health. We further delve into the heterogenous impacts of advanced energy adoption across different groups and find that women, old adults, and economically disadvantaged groups are more likely to experience greater mental health benefits compared to their counterparts, while the opposite results are observed for the physical health. Additionally, we differentiate the health impacts by distinguishing between various energy types. This study provides insights for policy making aimed at improving public health and promoting health equality, contributing to efforts towards achieving sustainable development goals by prioritizing clean and efficient residential energy solutions.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details




1 School of Public Affairs, Zhejiang University , Yuhangtang Road 866, 310058 Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China; German Institute of Development and Sustainability , Tulpenfeld 5, 53113 Bonn, Germany
2 China Academy for Rural Development, Department of Agricultural Economics and Management, Zhejiang University , Yuhangtang Road 866, 310058 Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China; MAgPIE-China Research Group , 310058 Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China
3 Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics, Michigan State University , East Lansing, MI 48824, United States of America
4 China Academy for Rural Development, Department of Agricultural Economics and Management, Zhejiang University , Yuhangtang Road 866, 310058 Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China; MAgPIE-China Research Group , 310058 Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China; Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Member of the Leibniz Association , 14473 Potsdam, Germany; Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford , Oxford OX1 2J, United Kingdom