, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 745–756 | Cite as

Adoption of Liquefied Petroleum Gas Stoves in Guatemala: A Mixed-Methods Study

  • Lisa M. ThompsonEmail author
  • Mayari Hengstermann
  • John R. Weinstein
  • Anaite Diaz-Artiga
Original Contribution


Household air pollution is the sixth leading risk factor for premature mortality in Guatemala. Households in Guatemala are gradually adopting liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) stoves, but a strong tradition of woodstove use persists. We conducted a mixed-methods study of LPG stove use in peri-urban Guatemala. We used knowledge, attitudes and practices surveys with 187 LPG stove owners who also used woodstoves to identify perceptions of stove and cooking practices. Barriers to sustained use of LPG stoves were evaluated through focus groups, participant observations with stove users, and key informant interviews with community leaders. Seven themes emerged that explain household decisions to use LPG stoves: (1) The “new technology” should be framed in terms of what the “old technology” lacks, (2) income is not a predictor of gas stove acquisition but may predict sustained use, (3) men are key decision-makers but messages about LPG do not target them, (4) when stoves are viewed as “prize possessions” they may not be used, (5) collective fear about gas stoves is not based on personal experience, but on “stories we hear,” (6) sustained LPG use is hampered by two major factors, seasonally available wood and LPG retailers who are perceived as dishonest, and (7) wood fuel collection is a time to enjoy the company of friends and family and is not “drudgery.” National policies should promote the use of clean cookstove technologies in peri-urban and rapidly urbanizing areas in Guatemala where LPG stoves are in use, but used intermittently, instead of the current plan to install 100,000 “improved” woodstoves by 2032. This could be done by improving dependable cylinder distribution services, targeting gas safety and promoting positive health messages that appeal to men, as well as women.


Household air pollution Liquefied petroleum gas Knowledge, attitudes and practices surveys Guatemala Mixed-methods 



We wish to acknowledge the hard work of the local field team in Guatemala. Without their commitment, this study would not have been achievable. Many thanks to César Vega González, Eduardo Canuz Castro, Paola García López, Elena Jirón Aguilar, Claudia Cojolón, Mirna Betzabé Esqueque and Rutilia Pérez Chicojay. We thank the participating families and community members in San Juan Alotenango for participating in this study. This project was part of a joint funding effort by the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, a public–private partnership hosted by the United Nations Foundation and the USAID Translating Research into Action Project (TRAction).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.


  1. Alexander, D., J. C. Linnes, S. Bolton, and T. Larson. 2014. Ventilated cookstoves associated with improvements in respiratory health-related quality of life in rural Bolivia. J Public Health (Oxf) 36:460-466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bielecki, C., and G. Wingenbach. 2014. Rethinking improved cookstove diffusion programs: A case study of social perceptions and cooking choices in rural Guatemala. Energy Policy 66:350-358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bryman, A. 2006. Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done? Qualitative Research 6:97-113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. DeWalt, K. M., and B. R. DeWalt. 2011. Participant Observation. A Guide for Fieldworkers. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Plymouth, UK.Google Scholar
  5. Edwards, J., and C. Langpap. 2005. Startup Costs and the Decision to Switch from Firewood to Gas Fuel. Land Economics 81:570-586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Glaser, B. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Transaction, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  7. Glaser, B. 1978. Theoretical sensitivity. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.Google Scholar
  8. Glaser, B. 1992. Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs. forcing. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.Google Scholar
  9. Glaser, B. 1998. Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussion. Sociology Press, Mill Valley, CA.Google Scholar
  10. Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves (2014) Guatemala country action plan for clean cookstoves and fuels, Guatemala City, GuatemalaGoogle Scholar
  11. Gobierno de Guatemala Instituto Nacional de Estadistica (2015) Compendio Estadistico Ambiental 2015, Guatemala City, GuatemalaGoogle Scholar
  12. Gobierno de Guatemala Ministerio de Energia y Minas (2017a) Plan Nacional de Energia 2017–2032 [National Energia Plan 2017–2032], Guatemala City, Guatemala: Gobierno de GuatemalaGoogle Scholar
  13. Gobierno de Guatemala Ministerio de Energia y Minas (2017b) Statistics on hydrocarbons, First report 2017, Guatemala City, Guatemala: Ministerio de Energia y MinasGoogle Scholar
  14. Goodwin, N. J., S. E. O’Farrell, K. Jagoe, J. Rouse, E. Roma, A. Biran, and E. A. Finkelstein. 2015. Use of behavior change techniques in clean cooking interventions: a review of the evidence and scorecard of effectiveness. J Health Commun 20 Suppl 1:43–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hollada, J., K. N. Williams, C. H. Miele, D. Danz, S. A. Harvey, and W. Checkley. 2017. Perceptions of Improved Biomass and Liquefied Petroleum Gas Stoves in Puno, Peru: Implications for Promoting Sustained and Exclusive Adoption of Clean Cooking Technologies. Int J Environ Res Public Health 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (2017) GBD compare, Seattle, WA: IHME, University of WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  17. Kumar, P., A. Dhand, R. G. Tabak, R. C. Brownson, and G. N. Yadama. 2017. Adoption and sustained use of cleaner cooking fuels in rural India: a case control study protocol to understand household, network, and organizational drivers. Arch Public Health 75:70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lewis, J. J., and S. K. Pattanayak. 2012. Who adopts improved fuels and cookstoves? A systematic review. Environ Health Perspect 120:637-645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Matinga, M. N., H. J. Annegarn, and J. S. Clancy. 2013. Healthcare provider views on the health effects of biomass fuel collection and use in rural Eastern Cape, South Africa: an ethnographic study. Soc Sci Med 97:192-200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mortimer, K., S. B. Gordon, S. K. Jindal, R. A. Accinelli, J. Balmes, and W. J. Martin, 2nd. 2012. Household air pollution is a major avoidable risk factor for cardiorespiratory disease. Chest 142:1308-1315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mukhopadhyay, R., S. Sambandam, A. Pillarisetti, D. Jack, K. Mukhopadhyay, K. Balakrishnan, M. Vaswani, M. N. Bates, P. L. Kinney, N. Arora, and K. R. Smith. 2012. Cooking practices, air quality, and the acceptability of advanced cookstoves in Haryana, India: an exploratory study to inform large-scale interventions. Glob Health Action 5:1-13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Naeher, L. P., M. Brauer, M. Lipsett, J. T. Zelikoff, C. D. Simpson, J. Q. Koenig, and K. R. Smith. 2007. Woodsmoke health effects: a review. Inhal Toxicol 19:67-106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Namagembe, A., N. Muller, L. M. Scott, G. Zwisler, M. Johnson, J. Arney, D. Charron, and E. Mugisha. 2015. Factors influencing the acquisition and correct and consistent use of the top-lit updraft cookstove in Uganda. J Health Commun 20 Suppl 1:76-83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Person, B., J. D. Loo, M. Owuor, L. Ogange, M. E. Jefferds, and A. L. Cohen. 2012. “It is good for my family’s health and cooks food in a way that my heart loves”: qualitative findings and implications for scaling up an improved cookstove project in rural Kenya. Int J Environ Res Public Health 9:1566-1580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Puzzolo, E., D. Pope, D. Stanistreet, E. A. Rehfuess, and N. G. Bruce. 2016. Clean fuels for resource-poor settings: A systematic review of barriers and enablers to adoption and sustained use. Environ Res 146:218-234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rehfuess, E. A., E. Puzzolo, D. Stanistreet, D. Pope, and N. G. Bruce. 2014. Enablers and barriers to large-scale uptake of improved solid fuel stoves: a systematic review. Environ Health Perspect 122:120-130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenbaum, J., E. Derby, and K. Dutta. 2015. Understanding consumer preference and willingness to pay for improved cookstoves in bangladesh. J Health Commun 20 Suppl 1:20-27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Smith, K. R. 2015. Changing Paradigms in Clean Cooking. Ecohealth 12:196-199.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Strauss, A., and J. Corbin. 1998. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2nd ed.). Sage, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  30. Thurber, M. C., C. Warner, L. Platt, A. Slaski, R. Gupta, and G. Miller. 2013. To promote adoption of household health technologies, think beyond health. Am J Public Health 103:1736-1740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. WHO. 2006. Fuel for Life: Household Energy and Health.Google Scholar
  32. WHO. 2014. Indoor Air Quality Guidelines: Household Fuel Combustion. World Health Organization, Geneva.Google Scholar
  33. World Bank. 2018. Guatemala: urbanization from 2007 to W. Bank, editor. World Bank.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© EcoHealth Alliance 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lisa M. Thompson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mayari Hengstermann
    • 2
  • John R. Weinstein
    • 3
  • Anaite Diaz-Artiga
    • 4
  1. 1.Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of NursingEmory UniversityAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Independent ConsultantBerlinGermany
  3. 3.School of MedicineBoston UniversityBostonUSA
  4. 4.Centro de Estudios en SaludUniversidad del Valle de GuatemalaGuatemala CityGuatemala

Personalised recommendations