Review on the Importance of Gender Perspective in Household Energy-Saving Behavior and Energy Transition for Sustainability
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Overview
1.2. Importance of Household Energy-Saving for Sustainability
1.3. Importance of Gender Participation in Household Energy Decisions
1.4. Objectives
- to address the association between energy usage/saving and impacts in sustainable development and
- to ascertain how gender participation in energy-saving behavior supports sustainable development
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Energy-Saving Concept Model Development
3.1.1. Energy-Saving Benefits for Sustainability
3.1.2. Energy-Saving Approach and Influencing Variables
3.1.3. Linkage of Energy-Saving and Energy Decision
3.2. Gender Concept Development for Sustainability
3.2.1. Historical Significance of Energy and Gender Integration
3.2.2. Major Themes in Energy and Gender for Sustainability
3.2.3. Gender Differences in the Household Energy-Saving Behavior and Decisions
- Roots of gender differences
3.2.4. Gender Participation in Household Energy Decision to Impact Energy-Saving
3.3. Overall Discussion and Limitations of the Study
4. Conclusions
- Building features, habits, and socio-economic factors have a major role in energy-saving behavior, and cultural norms/values are strongly linked to gender participation in energy decisions.
- The variables of gender, income, type of house, family composition, location, headship, age-group, ownership, and education are significant influencing factors in energy-saving behavior.
- The gender differences study recognized that socialization, social roles, perception, responsibility, and choice of energy appliances are roots of differences in energy decisions.
- Females use lower energy than males in household activities that has enhanced in household energy-saving.
- Holistic energy networking, gender education, infrastructure development, and mainstreaming gender approach are required to achieve sustainability with the realization of gender importance.
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Habtezion, S. Gender and Sustainable Energy: Training Module 4; United Nations Development Programme: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Santamouris, M. Energy consumption and environmental quality of the building sector. In Minimizing Energy Consumption, Energy Poverty and Global and Local Change in the Built Environment: Innovating to Zero; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Barr, S.; Prillwitz, J. Household analysis: Researching ‘green’ lifestyle a survey approach. In Methods of Sustainability Research in Social Sciences, 1st ed.; SAGE: London, UK, 2013; pp. 29–47. [Google Scholar]
- Fahy, F.; Rau, H. Methods of Sustainability in the Social Sciences, 1st ed.; SAGA: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Owens, J.; Wilhite, H. Household energy behavior in Nordic countries-an unrealized energy saving potential. Energy 1988, 13, 853–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WHO. Fuel for Life: Household Energy and Health; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Van Aelst, K. Household Decision-Making and Gender Relations in Tanzania: Literature and Theory Review; Working Paper; Universiteit Antwerpen: Antwerpen, Belgium, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Missri, E. Gender Differences in Decision Making Processes: A Computerized Experiment; A Paper on Honors Seminar; IDC Herzliya: Herzliya, Israel, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- IEA. The Energy Progress Report; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- ENERGIA. International Network on Gender and Sustainable Energy. In Gender in the Transition to Sustainable Energy for All: From Evidence to Inclusive Policies; ENERGIA: The Hague, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- IEA. Energy and Gender, International Energy Association. 2020. Available online: https://www.iea.org/topics/energy-and-gender (accessed on 1 June 2020).
- IEA. Nepal, International Energy Association. 2017. Available online: https://www.iea.org/sankey/#?c=Nepal&s=Balance (accessed on 5 March 2020).
- Milne, W. Women, Energy and Sustainability: Making Links, Taking Action. Can. Woman Stud. 2003, 23, 55–60. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, W.; Chao, M. Gender differences in energy-saving behavior. In Proceedings of the 6th Latin American Energy Economics Meeting, Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 2–5 April 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Ceceiski, E.W. From Rio to Beijing Engendering the energy debate New perspectives on energy. Energy Policy 1995, 23, 561–575. [Google Scholar]
- Wu, X. Men Purchase, Women Use: Coping with Domestic Electrical Appliances in Rural China. East Asian Sci. Technol. Soc. Int. J. 2008, 2, 211–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clancy, J.; Ummar, F.; Shakya, I.; Kelkar, G. Appropriate gender-analysis tools for unpacking the gender-energy-poverty nexus. Gend. Dev. 2007, 15, 241–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clancy, J.; Feenstra, M. Women, Gender Equality and the Energy Transition in the EU.; European Parliament: Strasbourg, France, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Nelson, S.; Kuriakose, A.T. Gender and Renewable Energy: Entry Points for Women’s Livelihoods and Employment; Climate Investment Funds: Washington DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Clancy, J.; Roehr, U. Gender and energy: Is there a Northern perspective? Energy Sustain. Dev. 2003, 7, 44–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Parikh, J. Hardships and health impacts on women due to traditional cooking fuels: A case study of Himachal Pradesh, India. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 7587–7594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paul, M.M.; Kumari, M.C. Decision Making: A Significant Indicator for Economic Empowerment of Women. Int. J. Sci. Res. 2016, 5, 1200–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ryan, S.E. Rethinking gender and identity in energy studies. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2014, 1, 96–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNDP. Human Development Report 2011: Sustainability and Equity: A Better Future for All; UNDP: New York, NY, USA, 2011; Volume 29. [Google Scholar]
- Wilhite, H. Energy Consumption as Cultural Practice: Implications for the Theory and Policy of Sustainable Energy Use. In Cultures of Energy: Power, Practices, Technologies; EBSCO: Ipswich, MA, USA, 2013; pp. 60–72. [Google Scholar]
- Dholakia, R.R.; Dholakia, N.; Firat, A.F. From social psychology to political economy: A model of energy use behavior. J. Econ. Psychol. 1983, 3, 231–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Raaij, W.F.; Verhallen, T.M.M. A Behavioral model of residential energy use. Econ. Psychol. 1983, 3, 39–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van Raaij, W.F.; Verhallen, T.M.M. Patterns of residential energy behavior. J. Econ. Psychol. 1983, 4, 85–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lutzenhiser, L. A cultural model of household energy consumption. Energy 1992, 17, 47–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuhe, A.; Bisu, D.Y.; Iortyer, H.A. Optimization of cooking energy mix, an alternative strategy to reduce deforestation: An example of households and restaurants in the Bauchi Metropolis, Nigeria. Afr. J. Sci. Technol. Innov. Dev. 2017, 9, 207–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masera, O.R.; Saatkamp, B.D.; Kammen, D.M. From linear fuel switching to multiple cooking strategies: A critique and alternative to the energy ladder model. World Dev. 2000, 28, 2083–2103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muller, C.; Yan, H. Household Fuel Use in Developing Countries: Review of Theory and Evidence. Energy Econ. 2018, 70, 429–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yu, B.; Zhang, J.; Fujiwara, A. Analysis of the residential location choice and household energy consumption behavior by incorporating multiple self-selection effects. Energy Policy 2012, 46, 319–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nasir, Z.A.; Murtaza, F.; Colbeck, I. Role of poverty in fuel choice and exposure to indoor air pollution in Pakistan. J. Integr. Environ. Sci. 2015, 12, 107–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hitchcock, G. An integrated framework for energy use and behavior in the domestic sector. Energy Build. 1993, 20, 151–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilk, R. Consumption, human needs, and global environmental change. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2002, 12, 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yust, B.L.; Guerin, D.A.; Coopet, J.G. Residential energy consumption: 1987 to 1997. Fam. Consum. Sci. Res. J. 2002, 30, 323–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keirstead, J. Evaluating the applicability of integrated domestic energy consumption frameworks in the UK. Energy Policy 2006, 34, 3065–3077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilson, C.; Dowlatabadi, H. Models of Decision Making and Residential Energy Use. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2007, 32, 169–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stephenson, J.; Barton, B.; Carrington, G.; Gnoth, D.; Lawson, R.; Thorsnes, P. Energy cultures: A framework for understanding energy behaviours. Energy Policy 2010, 38, 6120–6129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dietrich, K.; Latorre, J.M.; Olmos, L.; Ramos, A. Demand Response Mechanism Design and the Impact of Crucial Parameters on its Effectiveness. 2014, pp. 1–11. Available online: https://www.iit.comillas.edu/documentacion/IIT-13-027A/Demand_Response_Mechanism_Design_and_the_Impact_of_Crucial_Parameters_on_its_Effectiveness (accessed on 10 September 2021).
- Thayer, D.; Brummer, W.; Smith, B.A.; Aslin, R.; Gas, P. Is Behavioral Energy Efficiency and Demand Response Really Better Together? ACEEE Summer Study Energy Effic. Build. 2016, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
- Khan, I. Energy-saving behaviour as a demand-side management strategy in the developing world: The case of Bangladesh. Int. J. Energy Environ. Eng. 2019, 10, 493–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dillman, D.A.; Rosa, E.A.; Dillman, J.J. United States: The Poor Accept Lifestyle Cutbacks. Econ. Psychol. 1983, 3, 299–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stern, P.C.; Guagnano, G.A.; Dietz, T. Influences on attitude behaviour relationships: A natural experiment with curbside recycling. Environ. Behav. 1995, 27, 699–718. [Google Scholar]
- Sütterlin, B.; Brunner, T.A.; Siegrist, M. Who puts the most energy into energy conservation? A segmentation of energy consumers based on energy-related behavioral characteristics. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 8137–8152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Poortinga, W.; Steg, L.; Vlek, C.; Wiersma, G. Household preferences for energy-saving measures: A conjoint analysis. Econ. Psychol. 2003, 30, 49–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barr, S.; Gilg, A.W.; Ford, N. The household energy gap: Examining the divide between habitual- and purchase-related conservation behaviours. Energy Policy 2005, 33, 1425–1444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ribó-Pérez, D.; Larrosa-López, L.; Pecondón-Tricas, D.; Alcázar-Ortega, M. A critical review of demand response products as resource for ancillary services: International experience and policy recommendations. Energies 2021, 14, 846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stern, P.C. New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 407–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Painter, J.; Semenik, R.; Belk, R. Is there a generalized energy conservation ethic? A comparison of the determinants of gasoline and home heating energy conservation. J. Econ. Psychol. 1983, 3, 317–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trotta, G. Factors affecting energy-saving behaviours and energy efficiency investments in British households. Energy Policy 2018, 114, 529–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kerkhof, A.C.; Benders, R.M.J.; Moll, H.C. Determinants of variation in household CO2 emissions between and within countries. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 1509–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wall, R.; Crosbie, T. Potential for reducing electricity demand for lighting in households: An exploratory socio-technical study. Energy Policy 2009, 37, 1021–1031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yohanis, Y.G. Domestic energy use and householders’ energy behaviour. Energy Policy 2012, 41, 654–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Räty, R.; Carlsson-Kanyama, A. Comparing Energy Use by Gender, Age and Income in Some European Countries; Research Support and Administration, Swedish Defence Research Agency: Stockholm, Sweden, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Han, H.; Hsu, L.T.; Lee, J.S. Empirical investigation of the roles of attitudes toward green behaviors, overall image, gender, and age in hotel customers’ eco-friendly decision-making process. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2009, 28, 519–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yue, T.; Long, R.; Chen, H. Factors influencing energy-saving behavior of urban households in jiangsu province. Energy Policy 2013, 62, 665–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Do Paco, A.; Shiel, C.; Cotton, D.; Lavrador, T. Does Gender Really Matter When We Are Talking About Energy Saving Attitudes and Behaviours? In Proceedings of the International Congress on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Vitoria, Brazil, 24–27 June 2015; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- Mills, B.; Schleich, J. Residential energy-efficient technology adoption, energy conservation, knowledge, and attitudes: An analysis of European countries. Energy Policy 2012, 49, 616–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Thanh Nguyen, T.; Trung Duong, K.; Anh Do, T. Situational factor affecting energy-saving behavior in direct approaches in Hanoi City. The role of socio-demographics. Cogent Psychol. 2021, 8, 8634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hori, S.; Kondo, K.; Nogata, D.; Ben, H. The determinants of household energy-saving behavior: Survey and comparison in five major Asian cities. Energy Policy 2013, 52, 354–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sovacool, B.K.; Kester, J.; Noel, L.; de Rubens, G.Z. The demographics of decarbonizing transport: The influence of gender, education, occupation, age, and household size on electric mobility preferences in the Nordic region. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2018, 52, 86–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Zhu, J.; Ding, Z.; Zou, P.X.W.; Li, J. Typical energy-related behaviors and gender difference for cooling energy consumption. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matsumoto, S. Daily Habits and Energy Consumption: Go to Bed Earlier for Environmental Protection. Eur. J. Sustain. Dev. 2019, 8, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pandey, V.L.; Chaubal, A. Comprehending household cooking energy choice in rural India. Biomass Bioenergy 2011, 35, 4724–4731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikus, T.A.; Wayessa, B.G. Determinants of household energy choice in West Shoa Zone: In the case of Ambo Town. Int. J. Green Energy 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahut, D.B.; Das, S.; De Groote, H.; Behera, B. Determinants of household energy use in Bhutan. Energy 2014, 69, 661–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burke, P.J.; Dundas, G. Female Labor Force Participation and Household Dependence on Biomass Energy: Evidence from National Longitudinal Data. World Dev. 2015, 67, 424–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grünewald, P.; Diakonova, M. Societal differences, activities, and performance: Examining the role of gender in electricity demand in the United Kingdom. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2020, 69, 101719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shrestha, B.; Bajracharya, S.B.; Keitsch, M.M.; Tiwari, S.R. Gender differences in household energy decision-making and impacts in energy saving to achieve sustainability: A case of Kathmandu. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 28, 1049–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asibey, M.O.; Ocloo, K.A.; Amponsah, O. Gender differences and productive use of energy fuel in Ghana’s rural non-farm economy. Energy 2021, 215, 119068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNDP, The global goals for sustainable development. In Sustainable Development Goals; UNDP: New York, NY, USA, 2020.
- Fehner, T. History of Women in Energy Department. 2014. Available online: https://www.energy.gov/articles/history-women-energy-department (accessed on 2 June 2021).
- Cecelski, E. The Role of Women in Sustainable Economic Development; Thomson Reuters: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2012; pp. 1–38. [Google Scholar]
- Mahapatra, B.; Nayyar, A. Home energy management system (HEMS): Concept, architecture, infrastructure, challenges and energy management schemes. Energy Syst. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moser, C.; Moser, A. Gender mainstreaming since Beijing: A review of success and limitations in international institutions. Gend. Dev. 2005, 13, 11–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vainio, A.; Paloniemi, R. The complex role of attitudes toward science in pro-environmental consumption in the Nordic countries. Ecol. Econ. 2014, 108, 18–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunter, L.M.; Hatch, A.; Johnson, A.; Hunter, L.M.; Hatch, A. Johnson, Aaron Cross-National Gender Variation in Environmental Behaviors. Soc. Sci. Q. 2004, 85, 677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Do Paço, A.; Varejão, L. Factors affecting energy saving behaviour: A prospective research. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2010, 53, 963–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sigmon, S.T.; Stanton, A.L.; Snyder, C.R. Gender Differences in Coping: A Further Test of Socialization and Role Constraint Theories. Sex. Roles 1995, 33, 565–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wallhagen, M.; Eriksson, O.; Sörqvist, P. Gender differences in environmental perspectives among urban design professionals. Buildings 2018, 8, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Crow, S.M.; Fok, L.Y.; Hartman, S.J.; Payne, D.M. Gender and values: What is the impact on decision making? Sex. Roles 1991, 25, 255–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ponthieux, S.; Meurs, D. Gender inequality. In The Cambridge Handbook of Income Distribution; Anthony, B., Atkinson, F.B., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; Volume 1, pp. 983–1145. ISBN 9781108656184. [Google Scholar]
- Dyson, T.; Moore, M. On Kinship Structure, Female Autonomy, and Demographic Behavior in India. Popul. Dev. Rev. 1983, 9, 35–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alem, Y.; Hassen, S.; Köhlin, G. Decision-Making within the Household: The Role of Autonomy and Differences in Preferences Decision-making within the Household: The Role of Autonomy and Differences in Preferences; University of Gothenburg: Gothenburg, Sweden, 2018; Volume 2473. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, H.L. Decision Making within the Household. J. Consum. Res. 2002, 2, 241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shrestha, B.; Tiwari, S.; Bajracharya, S.; Keitsch, M. Role of gender participation in urban household energy technology for sustainability: A case of Kathmandu. Discov. Sustain. 2021, 2, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Permana, A.S.; Aziz, N.A.; Siong, H.C. Is mom energy efficient? A study of gender, household energy consumption and family decision making in Indonesia. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2015, 6, 78–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doss, C. Intrahousehold bargaining and resource allocation in developing countries. World Bank Res. Obs. 2013, 28, 52–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jalusic, V. Stretching and Bending the Meanings of Gender in Equality Politics; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2009; Volume 26, pp. 52–67. [Google Scholar]
Research Area | Keywords |
---|---|
Energy issue | Energy Energy consumption and efficiency Household energy-saving behavior |
Gender role | Gender lens Gender differences Gender needs Gender equality |
Step | Description | Total |
---|---|---|
Keywords search | Articles need to fulfill the search link to their title, abstract, or main text | 3037 |
Journal selection | Articles of peer-reviewed journals | 1814 |
Content analysis | Duplicates were avoided and ensured by scrutinizing the abstract on relevant topics | 500 |
Snowball search | Forward and backward searching refering to previous articles | 100 |
Sample size | - | 80 |
Authors | Country | Response Variables | Models | Application |
---|---|---|---|---|
Dholakia et al.1983 [26] | United States | Sociopolitical structure, social choice, choice alternatives, and demographic and physical characteristics. | Macro−micro- model Political model | Theory |
Van Raaij and Verhallen, 1983 [27] | The Netherlands | Socio-economic factors, lifestyle, climate, building characteristics, energy-related attitude, cost-benefit, information and relationship. | Behavior model | Hybrid |
Lutzenhiser, 1992 [29] | United States | Lifestyle, socio-cultural, demographics, cultural values. | Cultural model | Practical |
Hitchcock, 1993 [35] | United Kingdom | Physical and human subsystem. | System model | Practical |
Yust et al. 2002 [37] | United States | Natural, social, designed environment in the human organism. | Ecosystem model | Practical |
Wilk, 2002 [36] | Global Context | Habit, individual choice, social needs, cultural values, family member values (Global Consumption Model). | Multi-genic model Anthropology perspective | Theory |
Keirstead, 2006 [38] | United Kingdom | Physical environment, government, market, household, and society. | Actor-networked model | Practical |
Wilson and Dowlatabadi, 2007 [39] | Global Context | Conventional and behavioral economics model, technology diffusion model. Social psychology model, sociology decision model, | Decision-making model | Hybrid |
Stephenson et al., 2010 [40] | New Zealand | material culture, energy practices, cognitive norms. | Energy culture model | Practical |
Influencing/Dependable Variables | Authors |
---|---|
Energy-saving—Socioeconomic, personal beliefs, intentions, and attitudes | Stern, 2000 [50]; Stern et al. 1995 [45]; Sütterlin et al., 2011 [46]; Wilson and Dowlatabadi, 2007 [39] |
Attitudinal, personal determinants, habits or routines, and contextual forces. | Stern, 2000 [50]; Sütterlin et al., 2011 [46] |
Ownership, income, family composition, and age | Barr et al., 2005 [48]; Dillman et al., 1983 [44]; Painter et al., 1983 [51]; Trotta, 2018 [52] |
Gender, household size, education, and age group | Barr et al., 2005 [48] |
Income, family composition, location, and education | Kerkhof et al., 2009 [53]; Wall and Crosbie, 2009 [54]; Yohanis, 2012 [55] |
Authors | Country/Region | Sector/Concept | Energy-Saving |
---|---|---|---|
Räty and Carlsson-Janyama, 2009 [56] | Germany and Norway | Housing, food, transport sectors | Men used 7–80% more energy for transportation than women in Germany and Norway. Men used 30% more energy than women for food (going to restaurants). |
Han et al., 2009 [57] | World Context | Ecofriendly concept | Women/older people are engaged in green ecological behaviors and purchase decisions compared to men. |
Yue et al., 2013 [58] | China | Interpersonal behavior | Older people follow more energy-usage reduction behavior than those over 56 years. Middle-aged people have high consumption power to buy energy-efficient products but less time and energy to engage in usage reduction and interaction. |
Do Paco et al., 2015 [59] | Portugal and United Kingdom | Attitude of college students | Female students have more positive attitudes towards energy saving compared to male students. |
Mills and Schleich, 2012 [60] | EU countries and Norway | Family size consideration | Households with young children have higher levels of adopting energy-efficient technologies for energy savings. Households with elderly members have financial savings with lower levels of technology adoption. |
Thanh Nguyen et al., 2021 [61] | Vietnam | Aged group | Older people have higher energy needs, such as more heating and air conditioning that increase electricity consumption. |
Hori et al. (2013) [62] | Asian Cities | Community-based activities | Women and higher-aged people are higher in social interaction linked to energy-saving behaviors. |
Sovacool et al., 2018 [63] | World Context | Electric appliances and electric vehicles | Educated, employed men below middle age (30–45) are eager to buy efficient appliances. |
Wang et al., 2019 [64] | China | Household | Males use 1.2 to 1.5 times higher energy than females. |
Matsumoto, 2019 [65] | Japan | Household chores at night | Females used 0.14 kWh more energy than males due to more household works during sleeping time. |
Pandey and Chaubal, 2011 [66] Nikus and Wayessa, 2021 [67]; Rahut et al., 2014 [68] | India, Ethopia, and Bhutan | Household energy/clean fuel use | The higher the female education, the greater likelihood of clean fuels being used (r = 0.46). When household is female-headed (sig. 5%), a higher use of clean fuel is used. |
Burke and Dundas, 2015 [69] | Brazil | Household energy | With a greater percentage of female labor participation, there is a decrease in solid fuel use up to 25%. |
Grünewald and Diakonova, 2020 [70] | United Kingdom | Household energy | Male single households use 13% more energy compared to female single households. |
Shrestha et al., 2020 [71] | Nepal | Household | Up to 23% energy bill saving in households due to female participation in energy decisions. |
Key Theme—Linking Energy and Gender | Sub-Theme |
---|---|
1981: Renewable sources of energy | Women and energy |
1984: Energy and health | Biomass fuel combustion and health |
1985: Community energy | Community forestry and energy |
1992: Energy and environment | Women, wood fuel, and survival |
1995: ENERGIA—sustainable energy | International network |
1996: Energy and environment | Women’s role in renewable energy |
1997: Women’s role in energy | Gender in energy, renewable energy |
1998: Sustainable global energy | Women and energy sustainability |
2001: Sustainable development | Energy and gender needs |
2002: Levels of sustainability | Energy accessibility |
2006: Climate change | Energy, air pollution, industrial link |
2015: Sustainable energy | Renewable energy and environment |
Research Stream | Gaps and Future Research Streams | |
---|---|---|
Theme | Sub-Theme | |
Energy consumption and saving | Energy technology design Cultural perspective | Social perspective |
Energy networking business | ||
Industrial linkage | ||
Clean energy infrastructure | ||
Household energy decisions | ||
Energy and gender integration | Economic perspective (energy ladder) Pragmatic needs Strategic needs | Gender education |
Gender sensitization | ||
Gender-disaggregated | ||
Gender education and awareness | ||
Mainstreaming gender into energy decisions |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Shrestha, B.; Tiwari, S.R.; Bajracharya, S.B.; Keitsch, M.M.; Rijal, H.B. Review on the Importance of Gender Perspective in Household Energy-Saving Behavior and Energy Transition for Sustainability. Energies 2021, 14, 7571. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14227571
Shrestha B, Tiwari SR, Bajracharya SB, Keitsch MM, Rijal HB. Review on the Importance of Gender Perspective in Household Energy-Saving Behavior and Energy Transition for Sustainability. Energies. 2021; 14(22):7571. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14227571
Chicago/Turabian StyleShrestha, Bindu, Sudarshan R. Tiwari, Sushil B. Bajracharya, Martina M. Keitsch, and Hom B. Rijal. 2021. "Review on the Importance of Gender Perspective in Household Energy-Saving Behavior and Energy Transition for Sustainability" Energies 14, no. 22: 7571. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14227571