Diagnosis of Socio-Economic Prospects and Constraints for Household Biogas Adoption: A Case of Lizulu Market in Ntcheu District of Malawi

Abstract

Biogas is once again emerging as a potential household cooking option that can help developing countries achieve energy targets. However, the adoption of biogas remains relatively slow, necessitating a diagnosis of the problem the review of literature identified. The review identified key factors influencing the adoption of household biogas technology, including policy and regulatory frameworks, financing mechanisms, public awareness, and socio-economic factors. Therefore, this study involved undertaking a survey where heads of 385 households were interviewed. The study found that low income of households, averaging USD 67/month, is a major constraint to biogas adoption, especially when dirty fuels cost little or nothing. In addition, a lack of awareness of the benefits of biogas over the available dirty fuels has the potential to limit its adoption. This explains why 99% of the households interviewed indicated firewood and charcoal were their first option, and 52% believed that these dirty fuels were dependable. Regardless of these bottlenecks, the study found that households are ready to try better cooking options. About 99% of households were interested in using biogas, and 94% wanted to learn more about biogas. Therefore, there is a need for increased awareness, and suppliers must adopt innovations that make biogas more accessible and competitive against traditional cooking fuels.

1. Introduction

The 2024 International Energy Agency’s Energy Poverty Report indicated that renewable energy sources, including biogas, contributed the most to the overall growth in total energy supply, accounting for 38%. This was followed by natural gas (28%), coal (15%), oil (11%), and nuclear energy (8%). Globally, the use of traditional biomass for cooking has declined in many areas, but Sub-Saharan Africa remains an exception, where most households still rely on charcoal and firewood for cooking due to limited access to cleaner alternatives [1,2,3,4].

Africa holds significant potential for biogas production, yet progress in developing the sector remains limited [5]. While the continent has advanced in implementing small-scale and household biogas systems, commercial biodigesters are still at an early stage. Numerous national and regional studies have explored Africa’s biogas potential, covering technical, economic, and policy aspects [6]. Research conducted in South Africa, home to the continent’s largest installed electricity generation capacity, revealed that, despite the installation of approximately 700 biogas plants, only around 300 were operational as of 2017. Among those in operation, roughly 90% were household systems [2]. In the East African region, countries such as Uganda have a largely underdeveloped policy and regulatory framework for supporting renewable energy development, including biogas. The existing policy environment includes the Energy Policy, which aims to establish a financially sustainable electricity sector without subsidies and was completed in 2012. Additionally, the Renewable Energy Policy 2007 set a target to increase the share of renewable energy sources to 61% of total energy consumption by 2017. Furthermore, Vision 2040 acknowledges the significance of technological energy choices in addressing climate change. While these targets have yet to be fully realized, efforts to promote biogas and other renewable energy technologies through subsidies, tax incentives, and public awareness campaigns continue to progress, albeit at a slow pace, toward 2030 [7,8]. Biogas technology, like other renewable energy solutions, has not gained significant traction in Malawi. However, several African nations, including Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Rwanda, Cameroon, Burkina Faso, and Benin, have successfully leveraged the technology [9]. Some of these countries share borders with Malawi and experience similar tropical climate conditions, suggesting that biogas technology could also be a viable option for Malawi.

In Malawi, biomass in the form of firewood, charcoal, and agricultural waste accounts for more than 97% of household cooking energy [10,11,12,13,14], but the challenge is worse in rural areas. Currently, less than 10% of the rural population has access to electricity [15,16], and the majority of those connected to the grid do not use electricity for cooking [3,12]. Additionally, alternative cooking fuels in rural areas are almost nonexistent. Therefore, households in rural areas rely on dirty and unsustainable fuels, such as fuelwood, charcoal, and agricultural waste [6,7,10,14,17]. The country consumes about 9.2 metric tons of firewood and 1.7 metric tons of charcoal annually [15]. The unsustainable use of fuelwood and charcoal is criticized for the high rates of deforestation and land degradation being experienced in the country [3,14]. Due to high rates of deforestation, fuelwood and charcoal have become less accessible and unaffordable [10,11,14]. In addition, various studies have reported that the use of these dirty fuels (in this study, dirty fuels refer to traditional, inefficient, and highly polluting energy sources used for cooking, such as firewood, charcoal, kerosene, coal, and agricultural residues) is blamed for indoor emissions that cause respiratory diseases among women and children [7,10,15,18]. Therefore, the government and development stakeholders are increasingly promoting transitioning to clean and sustainable cooking options to reduce national overdependence on firewood and charcoal [10].

The Government of Malawi (GoM) adopted the National Energy Policy and the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) National Action Agenda, which seeks to achieve universal access to modern, affordable, and sustainable energy by the year 2030 [3,6,10,15,19]. However, with only seven years remaining, it is impractical for the country to achieve this ambitious goal by 2030. Malawi’s 2018 Energy Policy, under its third broad objective, aims to ensure the availability of biogas in sufficient quantities at affordable prices for both industrial and domestic use. Additionally, the 2024 Malawi Energy Compact plans to roll out 80,000 biogas cookstoves by introducing tax incentives and duty exemptions for project developers, private sector players, cooperatives, and other stakeholders to promote the adoption of biogas solutions. Ref [9] reported that since the introduction of biogas technology in Malawi, various initiatives led by the government, individuals, and private sector players have focused on expanding access to biogas solutions, particularly for poorer communities and households. Organizations such as Malawi University of Science and Technology, Mzuzu University, EcoGen, Green Impact Technologies, the Ministry of Energy, Intrinsic Biogas, and Community Energy Malawi have been instrumental in these efforts, installing a total of 343 community home-based biogas systems aimed at improving energy access for low-income households. The country must explore alternative pathways for achieving cooking energy objectives and goals. For instance, one of the strategies identified by the national energy policy is promoting alternative energy technologies, such as biogas and LPG, to reduce the demand for charcoal and firewood [7]. The government of Malawi, through the Malawi Energy Regulatory Authority (MERA), has been promoting the use of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) to improve access to clean cooking energy. However, this imported LPG is less affordable and not widely accessible in the country [1,7,10,15]. The costs of the imported LPG cylinders are extremely high, thus creating a major obstacle to the adoption of LPG as cooking fuel [10]. In addition, the lack of foreign currency affects the importation of adequate LPG [13].

The power outages have led to high dependency on biomass energy, especially charcoal for cooking, which is an unsustainable and unreliable source of energy in Malawi [1,7]. The average electricity tariff will be adjusted by 50.8% segmented into four annual tranches of 18%, 16%, 12%, and 9% to be implemented from 2023 to 2027 [20]. It is driving deforestation and forest degradation, with an estimated 75,000 hectares of natural forest across Malawi destroyed annually [13]. The 2018 Malawi Energy Policy’s goal is to “enhance access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, efficient, and modern energy for all Malawians by 2030”. It promotes the sustainable production and utilization of charcoal and firewood while promoting alternative energy sources, such as LPG, to reduce dependence on degradable biomass for cooking. LPG has the potential to deliver major health benefits as well as to reduce the adverse climate impacts associated with current cooking fuels used [3,12]. Promoting access to cleaner cooking fuels and devices would contribute to environmental and developmental goals. The main debates still revolve around the issues of sustainability, availability, affordability, perception, cost, safety, and other barriers associated with alternative cooking solutions [7]. A number of challenges remain, including cultural habits of using biomass for cooking, unfamiliarity with solutions such as LPG, briquettes, and pellets, the wider availability and affordability of biomass fuels, and the relatively high cost of alternatives and equipment [21].

Amidst the challenges concerning the adoption of modern cooking options, such as LPG and electricity [1,3,12], biogas is emerging as a viable option for addressing cooking energy poverty in urban as well as rural areas. Currently, 10.6% and 0.2% of the city population use electricity and LPG for cooking and heating, respectively [21]. Biogas is a clean and renewable fuel generated through a process called Anaerobic Digestion (AD), a process in which special microorganisms digest organic material in sealed containers to produce biogas, which is a mixture of methane, carbon dioxide, and other gases [21,22,23]. Biogas can be produced from any biodegradable material, such as animal manure and food waste [23,24,25]. Biogas produced can be used for cooking, heating, and electricity generation [23,24,26,27,28]. Bioslurry produced as a byproduct is rich in soil nutrients, and farmers use it for crop cultivation [18,21,25,29,30]. Smallholder farmers are already transitioning to organic manure because inorganic fertilizers have become unaffordable [31,32,33]. In addition, the use of organic waste as a feedstock contributes to community sanitation [21,29,30]. For markets that produce enormous amounts of vegetable waste, it becomes a natural choice to adopt the technology as it helps to solve waste management challenges. Surprisingly, the progress of biogas development has been slow, and the use of dirty fuels remains unabated, as evidenced by the inability of the country to reduce the role of firewood and charcoal in the nation’s energy mix.

Malawi’s heavy reliance on firewood and charcoal for cooking has led to severe environmental degradation, deforestation, and health risks from indoor air pollution. With biomass accounting for 99% of household cooking energy and rural electricity access below 14%, there is an urgent need to explore alternative solutions such as biogas. As a renewable energy source derived from organic waste, biogas presents a viable alternative for clean cooking while also addressing waste management challenges. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the socio-economic factors influencing household adoption of biogas at Lizulu Market in Ntcheu District, an area with low electricity access and significant organic waste generation. The study identified barriers and opportunities for biogas uptake and will contribute to clean energy policy discussions and inform strategies for increasing accessibility, affordability, and awareness. The findings will support mostly African countries’ energy transition efforts and the Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) Action Agenda, which seeks universal access to modern and sustainable energy by 2030. Understanding household adoption dynamics will help shape interventions that reduce dependence on firewood and charcoal, ultimately promoting a cleaner environment and improving public health.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Description of the Study Area

This study was conducted in the Lizulu Market area located in Ntcheu District, which is in the central region of Malawi. The geographical coordinates of the area are 14° 31′ 0″ south and 34° 28′ 0″ east. Lizulu is a rural area that is known for agricultural activities and organic waste generation, which are carelessly dumped at the market and river streams. Careless dumping of organic waste at the market and its surroundings has created significant environmental, health, and economic consequences. Environmentally, decomposing waste releases methane, a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change [25]. It also clogs drainage systems, leading to waterlogging and increased flooding risks, especially during the rainy season. Additionally, organic waste contaminates nearby water sources, reducing water quality. From a health perspective, rotting waste attracts pests such as flies, rats, and stray animals, which can spread diseases like cholera, dysentery, and respiratory infections [34].

The surrounding communities grow various fruits and vegetables, which farmers and traders sell at this market. Every day the market manages enormous quantities of these fruits and vegetables, serving consumers in major cities of Malawi, especially Lilongwe and Blantyre. Consequently, this market generates substantial amounts of organic waste. The Malawi University of Science and Technology (MUST) and Green Impact Technologies (GIT) in Malawi have piloted commercial biogas generation at Lizulu, where the plant uses organic waste to produce biogas and organic manure. A pilot study conducted by MUST and GIT at Lizulu Market, a key trading hub for small-scale farmers specializing in horticultural produce, evaluated organic waste generation through a comprehensive site assessment, waste characterization, sampling, and measurement over seven days. The findings indicated that over 90% of the market’s waste consists of biodegradable vegetable matter, highlighting its potential for biogas production. The study estimated that the organic waste from Lizulu Market could support a 2000 cubic meter biogas digester, but currently the market has a 40 m³ capacity biodigester only. In addition to organic vegetable waste, cooperatives and small-scale farmers around Lizulu Market raise livestock, providing an additional source of feedstock for biogas generation. This combination of waste streams enhances the market’s potential for sustainable waste-to-energy solutions, creating opportunities to boost renewable energy production and improve waste management efficiency. Therefore, Lizulu was determined to be a suitable area for this study, and the results will help to unearth the socio-economic prospects and constraints that development stakeholders will face as they promote the adoption of biogas for cooking by households in various locations of Malawi. Figure 1 shows the study area of Lizulu Market in Ntcheu District of Malawi.

2.2. Research Design and Conceptual Framework

A cross-sectional research design was applied in this study design, collecting data from households in the Lizulu Market area and surrounding communities. The survey method was chosen to gather quantitative data addressing household socio-economic status and cooking fuel preferences with barriers and opportunities regarding biogas adoption as cooking fuel. This design allows the collection of data on more than one case and at a single point in time to gather a body of quantitative or quantifiable data in connection with two or more variables, which are then examined to detect patterns of association. During data collection, the participants were questioned on the available cooking fuels in their communities, with an understanding that they know the advantages and disadvantages of such cooking fuels. However, biogas is new; thus, some had already heard about this cooking fuel, but they had never used it before, which means that they were not aware of the benefits of biogas over traditional cooking fuels. On the other hand, others were completely unaware of the biogas cooking fuel. In this case, enumerators had to explain what the biogas cooking fuel is and its advantages and disadvantages without comparing it with other cooking fuels. Therefore, the respondents had adequate knowledge of various cooking options.

This study employed a cross-sectional research design to assess household socio-economic status, cooking fuel preferences, and the barriers and opportunities influencing biogas adoption in the Lizulu Market area and surrounding communities. In addition to quantitative, the study also employed the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), which provided in-depth insights into the perceptions, experiences, and challenges related to household biogas adoption in Lizulu Market and its surrounding communities. Four FGDs were conducted, each comprising 8–12 participants, carefully selected based on factors such as gender, age, socio-economic status, and experience with alternative cooking fuels. The discussions explored themes such as biogas awareness, energy choices, socio-cultural factors, economic considerations, and adoption barriers. The conceptual framework is anchored in Energy Transition Theory, which explains how factors such as awareness, perceived benefits, and socio-economic conditions shape the adoption of new technologies like biogas. The concept of energy transition as a key solution to climate change gained widespread recognition following the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the establishment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by the United Nations in 2015 [3].

The study examined two primary sets of variables: independent variables, which include household socio-economic characteristics (such as income levels, education, and household size), and dependent variables, including cooking fuel choices and willingness to adopt biogas. Additionally, intervening variables, such as awareness and access to information on biogas, play a crucial role in shaping decision-making processes. Utilizing a survey methodology, the study identified patterns of association between these variables, offering insights into how knowledge dissemination influences household energy preferences. Since biogas is relatively new in the region, the survey was administered to non-users of biogas to assess their awareness, perceptions, opportunities, and potential adoption barriers. Enumerators played a vital role in addressing the knowledge gap by explaining its benefits and limitations, ensuring that respondents had sufficient information to evaluate its potential compared to traditional cooking fuels. The study ensured the voices of women were adequately represented in the Lizulu study by implementing gender-sensitive sampling and data collection strategies. First, during household selection, efforts were made to include female-headed households and women within male-headed households to capture diverse perspectives on cooking fuel preferences and energy needs. Second, enumerators were trained to engage both men and women in discussions, creating an inclusive environment where women felt comfortable sharing their experiences. Additionally, the study considered the socio-cultural dynamics of the community by consulting local leaders and women’s groups to encourage female participation.

2.3. Sample Size and Sampling Methods

This study used Cochran’s formula, shown in Equation (1), to calculate the sample size of 385 participants. The formula is suitable when the population considered is deemed to be infinite. The research study also used a probability sampling technique to ensure that each member of the target population had an equal and independent chance of being selected for the sample. Simple random sampling was specifically employed to avoid any selection bias and ensure that the sample accurately represents the population.

$$\begin{array}{c}{n}_0={\displaystyle \frac{z^2\times pq}{e^2}}\hfill \\ n_0={\displaystyle \frac{{\left(1.96\right)}^2\times \left(0.5\right)\left(0.5\right)}{{\left(0.05\right)}^2}}=385 \mathrm{Sample} \mathrm{size}\hfill \end{array}$$

(1)

where

n₀ = required sample size

Z = Z-value, which corresponds to the desired confidence level (95% confidence level, Z = 1.96)

p = estimated population proportion (if unknown, 0.5 is often used to get the maxim um sample size)

q = 1 − p

e = margin of error

The simple random sampling approach was conducted by first delineating the study area within Lizulu Market and its surrounding communities. Given that an official household list was unavailable, a systematic field-mapping exercise was undertaken in collaboration with local leaders to identify and approximate the number of households within the target area. To ensure randomness, a lottery method was used, where households were assigned numbers, and a random number generator was applied to select participants. Enumerators then visited the selected households to conduct interviews. The primary criteria for selection were: residence in the study area—Only households within the predefined Lizulu Market area were eligible; cooking fuel use—Households were included regardless of their current cooking fuel type to capture a diverse range of experiences; willingness to participate—Participation was voluntary, with informed consent obtained before data collection. This method ensured that every household had an equal chance of selection while maintaining representativeness despite the logistical challenges of obtaining a formal household list.

2.4. Target Population

The target population for the survey was comprised of households in the Lizulu Market zone. The household head was chosen as the primary respondent, and in this study, the household head is defined as the person who is a breadwinner regardless of their gender, whether male or female. The household head understands the socio-economic issues such as household income and expenditures and cooking energy options. However, other family members were given an opportunity to help the household heads answer the questions to obtain detailed and accurate information.

2.5. Sources of Data and Data Collection Methods

Primary data were collected directly from the respondents using a semi-structured questionnaire. Both qualitative and quantitative research techniques were applied in this study. Data were collected through focus group discussion, key informant interviews, questionnaire surveys, and personal observations. Secondary data were collected from relevant published and unpublished sources like books, journal articles, the internet, and reports from the Ministry of Energy and the district energy office.

2.5.1. Focus Group Discussion (FGD)

The focus group discussion (FGD) was employed to gather information on the shared experiences, perceptions, and opinions of community members regarding biogas utilization. To achieve this, 4 focus groups were formed, each consisting of 8–12 participants carefully selected based on their experience with alternative cooking fuels, age, gender, and socioeconomic status. A moderator facilitated the discussions using a semi-structured guide, and the sessions were audio-recorded, lasting approximately 1 h. This approach yielded rich, qualitative data on the benefits and challenges of biogas utilization in the Lizulu area, as well as suggestions for improvement along with the feasible technology that could be employed.

The participants for the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were selected through purposive sampling, ensuring a diverse representation based on experience with alternative cooking fuels, age, gender, and socio-economic status. This selection process allowed the study to gather a wide range of perspectives on biogas utilization, particularly from those who had firsthand experience with or knowledge of cooking alternatives. To ensure gender inclusivity, the focus groups were split by gender, allowing for open and comfortable discussions where both men and women could freely express their thoughts without the influence of the opposite sex. This separation was critical to ensure that women, often the primary decision-makers regarding household cooking, could voice their opinions in a space where their perspectives were prioritized.

The FGDs were facilitated by trained professionals with experience in qualitative research and group facilitation. They used a semi-structured guide to ensure key topics were covered while allowing room for participants to share their personal experiences and opinions. Ethical principles were strictly adhered to throughout the process. Informed consent was obtained from each participant, and confidentiality was assured. Additionally, the facilitators ensured that no participant felt coerced, and participation was voluntary, with the right to withdraw at any time. The language of the discussions was primarily Chichewa, the local language spoken by the community, to ensure that all participants fully understood the questions and could communicate their thoughts effectively. The sessions were audio-recorded with the participants’ consent, ensuring accurate data collection while respecting their privacy. This approach was designed to ensure that the FGDs were inclusive, respectful, and conducted in an ethical manner.

2.5.2. Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)

Key informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted to gather in-depth information from individuals with expertise or experience in biogas utilization. A total of 5 key informants were identified, including biogas users, local leaders, and energy experts. This approach provided detailed, qualitative insights into the opportunities and challenges of biogas utilization, as well as recommendations for future development.

The KIIs were conducted to gather in-depth information from individuals with expertise or direct experience in biogas utilization. A total of five key informants were selected for the interviews, with a diverse range of backgrounds. The informants included biogas users, local leaders, and energy experts, providing a comprehensive perspective on the subject.

The biogas users were selected from the Lizulu Biogas Plant, located approximately 47.8 km from the Lizulu area via M1 Road in Ntcheu, Malawi. These users were selected based on their direct experience with biogas as a cooking fuel, providing valuable insights into the practical challenges and benefits of using biogas in households. The biogas users included both male and female household representatives, aged between 30 and 60 years, who had been utilizing the system for an extended period.

The local leaders included community heads and representatives from the Lizulu area, aged between 35 and 60 years, who were involved in local governance or community decision-making processes. These individuals were selected for their knowledge of community dynamics, their ability to provide feedback on the adoption of biogas in the region, and their role in supporting or promoting energy solutions at the grassroots level.

The energy experts were professionals in the field of renewable energy, with specific expertise in biogas technology and its integration into local energy systems. These experts were selected from institutions (Ntcheu District Council officials, Intrinsic Biogas, EcoGen, Green Impact Technologies, etc.) or organizations that work on energy solutions in Malawi, with ages ranging from 35 to 55 years. They provided valuable technical insights into the feasibility, potential, and challenges of biogas utilization.

The key informants’ age and gender varied, ensuring a broad spectrum of perspectives. This approach enabled the study to capture diverse views on biogas use and adoption, from those who are directly engaged with the technology to those who influence energy policy and development in the region. Through this mix of informants, the KIIs provided rich, qualitative data on the opportunities and challenges of biogas utilization in the Lizulu area.

2.5.3. Questionnaire Surveys

Questionnaire surveys were administered to collect quantitative data on the demographics, biogas usage patterns, willingness to pay, ability to pay, and perceptions of households in the Lizulu area. A semi-structured questionnaire was designed and pre-tested to ensure its effectiveness. Then, 385 households were randomly selected for the survey, and trained enumerators administered the questionnaires through face-to-face interviews. This approach yielded quantitative data on household characteristics, cooking solutions used by households in the area, biogas potential adoption rates, usage patterns, and satisfaction levels.

2.5.4. Personal Observations

Personal observations were made to gather firsthand information on the biogas infrastructure in the area, fuel stacking, usage patterns, and challenges faced by households in accessing energy for cooking, as well as their current household expenditures. The researcher conducted detailed observations in 20 households, all of which had potential feedstock sources for biogas. These households were purposively and carefully selected, as they not only generated organic waste from daily activities but also kept livestock, such as cattle and pigs, which could contribute significantly to the feedstock for biogas production. The presence of livestock, particularly cattle and pigs, provided an additional and valuable source of manure, enhancing the sustainability and efficiency of the biogas systems.

During the observations, attention was given to the suitability of biogas system designs, installation quality, and ongoing maintenance practices. The researcher noted how the livestock waste, particularly from cattle and pigs, was utilized in the area, highlighting the role of animal manure in improving the efficiency and consistency of biogas production. Observations also included how households managed their feedstock, whether it was primarily vegetable waste, livestock manure, or a combination of both. Additionally, the researcher evaluated fuel stacking practices, where households utilized a mix of traditional cooking fuels (such as firewood) alongside charcoal, and examined how this impacted overall energy consumption and expenditures.

The researcher is also exploring the potential of developing a commercial-scale biogas facility at Lizulu Market. This facility would serve as a central hub for biogas production, and households would be able to adopt a more sustainable cooking solution by using backpacks and stoves that would be refilled at the biogas facility located at the market. This model aims to not only support biogas adoption in the community but also create a reliable, localized source of clean cooking fuel, reducing reliance on traditional fuels like firewood and charcoal, while providing a sustainable waste-to-energy solution. The potential to integrate both market waste and household waste into this commercial biogas system offers an efficient approach to addressing energy needs, waste management, and environmental sustainability in the area.

Further, the surrounding environment was carefully observed for any potential health hazards, particularly related to waste management practices and the handling of organic materials for biogas production. These observations provided valuable qualitative insights into the practicalities of biogas utilization, including the complexities of system design, feedstock availability, usage patterns, and maintenance challenges. The integration of livestock waste into the biogas system played a key role in the households’ ability to maintain consistent biogas production, thus improving the overall viability of the technology as a reliable cooking energy source.

2.6. Research Ethics and Approval/Ethical Considerations

Participants were assured full anonymity and privacy, with their responses used solely for study evaluation. Additionally, formal approvals were secured from the Ntcheu District Council and the Lizulu Market Committee to conduct research in their communities.

As part of the National Commission for Science and Technology (NCST) demonstration pilots for biogas commercialization, the study complied with ethical standards, including informed consent, confidentiality, data protection, voluntary participation, the right to withdraw, and cultural sensitivity. To ensure community trust and collaboration, the researcher engaged local leaders, government officials from the Department of Social Welfare and the Ministry of Gender and representatives from district council departments.

2.7. Data Analysis

The data were analyzed using the statistical packages IBM SPSS Statistics is Version 30.0.0, STATA 18, and Microsoft Excel 2021, which enable users to manipulate, analyze, and visualize substantial amounts of data very quickly and with ease. The study employed descriptive statistics (means, percentages, and frequencies) and inferential statistics (econometric output) for summarizing essential demographic and socio-economic variables such as household income and preferences for cooking energy and biogas technology awareness. The data were also cross-tabulated to examine relationships between variables, such as the association between household income and the willingness to adopt biogas as cooking fuel. This comprehensive data analysis helped to draw conclusions about the feasibility of promoting biogas adoption in Lizulu Market and its surrounding communities.

3. Results

3.1. Socio-Economic Status of the Respondents and Households at Lizulu Market

The study involved assessing the socio-economic status of the households at Lizulu Market because they play a critical role in influencing the adoption of biogas. The areas of focus were education, sources of livelihoods, and household income. The results showed that generally education levels were very low; petty trading, casual labor and farming accounted for the major sources of livelihood; and on average the households earned 67 USD. Some respondents were unable to determine their monthly income because their income varies throughout the year. Therefore, for those who are dependent on trading and piecework, their monthly income was calculated based on their average daily income. However, for those involved in farming, their monthly income was determined based on the seasonal or annual income.

Table 1. Socio-economic information of the respondents.

Assessed Socio-Economic Factors	Results Descriptions
Gender and marital status of the Respondents	The percentages of male and female respondents were 73% and 27%, respectively. It was determined that the respondents that were married, single, widowed, and divorced accounted for 66%, 18%, 11%, and 6%, respectively.
Education Level of the Household Heads	The family heads who attained primary education, secondary school education, vocational diplomas, and university diplomas/degrees accounted for 56%, 31%, 1%, and 1%, respectively. In addition, 10% of the respondents have never been to school, and 1% of the respondents attended adult literacy education.
Household Sources of Livelihoods at Lizulu Market.	The study findings showed that 37%, 22%, 22%, 12%, 6%, and 1% of the respondents were engaged in petty trading, casual labor, farming, full-time employment, business, and others, respectively.
Households Income Generation at Lizulu Market.	The average monthly income was USD 67 for households having an average occupancy rate of 4.6.

shows the results on the socio-economic status of the households at Lizulu Market.

3.2. Current Household Cooking Fuel Choices and Purchase Decision Making Process

To identify the cooking energy choices of households, the study pre-identified the cooking energy sources mostly used in Lizulu. The identified cooking energy sources were charcoal, electricity, firewood, and maize cobs. Each respondent (i.e., household head) was requested to identify the first, second, third, and fourth cooking energy options for the household. The study findings show that charcoal remains the preferred cooking energy option for 75% of the sampled households in Lizulu; the high usage of charcoal and firewood is often driven by limited access to alternative energy sources. Firewood was determined to be a cooking fuel that is regarded as the first option for 24% of households. Therefore, biomass in the form of fuelwood and charcoal is regarded as the first cooking option for 99% of the households at Lizulu Market (

Table 2. Household cooking choices at Lizulu Market.

Ranking	Fuel Type	%
First	Charcoal	75%
	Electricity	1%
	Firewood	24%
	Maize Cobs	0%
Second	Charcoal	21.5%
	Electricity	2.4%
	Firewood	75.1%
	Maize Cobs	1%
Third	Briquettes	17%
	Charcoal	17%
	Electricity	50%
	Firewood	16%
Fourth	Maize Cobs	100%

), which is in line with the findings of many similar studies in Malawi [1,11,12]. Additionally, none of the respondents mentioned a fourth cooking energy option, regardless of agricultural waste widely being used by low-income households. Table 2 shows cooking energy choices of the households.

This study sought to determine the responsibility of cooking fuel purchasing at the household level at Lizulu Market. The results showed that male household heads, female household heads, other male household members, and other female household members who were responsible for providing money for purchasing cooking fuel accounted for 62%, 32%, 1%, and 2%, respectively. In addition, the findings showed that female household heads, male household heads, other female household members, and male household members that were responsible for purchasing the firewood after the money was provided accounted for 79%, 18%, 2%, and 1%, respectively.

3.3. Existing Cooking Fuel Reliability and User Satisfaction

Reliability refers to cooking fuel availability and the ease with which it can be used for cooking. It should be noted here that charcoal and firewood cooking fuels are regarded as the first cooking energy options for 99% of households. Therefore, it can be concluded that household responses address the reliability of charcoal and firewood cooking fuels. The study findings showed that 52% of households thought the cooking fuels that they currently use were the most dependable. About 25% and 13% of the households responded that the cooking fuels are moderately dependable and partially reliable, respectively. On the other hand, only 10% of them responded that the cooking fuels they use are not reliable (Figure 2).

3.4. Prospects for Biogas Adoption

3.4.1. Household Biogas Awareness, and Willingness to Adopt

Of the 385 households interviewed, the study findings showed that only 62% of them were aware of biogas at Lizulu Market, 79% of them had never used biogas for cooking, 99% of the households were willing to try using biogas, mainly because it was a new technology, and 94% of them were interested in learning more about biogas. Occupation had no bearing on the adoption of biogas. The results of the Z-test suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in biogas awareness between males and females. The proportion of males who reported being aware of biogas was 40.2% (SD = 0.052), while for females, it was 37.3% (SD = 0.031). The computed Z-score of 0.63, with a corresponding p-value of 0.6, indicates that the observed difference is not statistically significant at conventional significance levels. These findings imply that knowledge about biogas is relatively uniform across genders in the study area, suggesting that gender may not be a key determinant of awareness. This could be attributed to similar exposure to information sources, such as community meetings, radio programs, or social interactions. However, further investigation into other socio-demographic factors, such as education level and household decision-making dynamics, could provide deeper insights into the factors influencing biogas awareness. A chi-square test of independence was conducted to assess the relationship between occupation and interest in biogas adoption. The results were not statistically significant, χ²(5, N = 320) = 6.38, p > 0.1\chi² (5, N = 320) = 6.38, p > 0.1, indicating that there was no meaningful association between household willingness to adopt biogas and the type of occupation they were engaged in. This suggests that occupation did not play a determining role in influencing household interest in biogas adoption.

3.4.2. Household Motivations and Demotivation for Transitioning to Biogas

The study findings also showed that households had other reasons for transitioning to biogas apart from socio-economic issues. For instance, most of the households (i.e., 49%) wanted just to try the new cooking technology, whereas 31% of them cited their economic status, which can allow them to buy biogas for cooking. Note that the price for biogas was USD 0.48/m³. This amount of biogas is enough to last 2 days for a household (i.e., the household size on average is 4.6 at Lizulu), based on the study findings for Lizulu Biogas Plants. The others cited technological and environmental benefits associated with the use of biogas for cooking.

Table 3. Reasons for willingness to transition to biogas.

Reasons for Willingness to Try Use Biogas for Cooking
Reason	No of Respondents	Percentage
Just to try them	156	49%
Fuel efficient	88	28%
Current stove not fuel efficient	59	18%
Can afford to buy	98	31%
Portable	9	3%
Safe to use	23	7%
Not willing to buy	5	2%
To conserve the environment	13	4%

shows different reasons why respondents were interested in biogas.

The study also investigated the ability to pay by the households, based on their monthly income, but also their preferred payment option. In this case, the average income was determined to be USD 67 per month. Based on this income, 66% of the households indicated their willingness to pay using cash, while the remaining 34% preferred obtaining the biogas on credit. However, this was dependent on the price of the biogas. On average, the respondents were willing to pay USD 3.5 per week. However, at the time of the study, these households were spending USD 7.6 on charcoal per month and USD 5.7 on firewood. The study also sought to determine factors that may contribute to low adoption of biogas. The results showed that inaccessibility, lack of money/high cost of biogas, cultural beliefs, and others were cited by 97%, 3%, 0%, and 0% of the respondents, respectively.

3.5. A Comparison of the Socio-Economic Factors Influencing Biogas Adoption in Regional Countries and Africa

To understand the adoption of biogas for household and cooking use in other countries, it is very crucial to understand the patterns and the socio-economic factors that drive the adoption of biogas. Therefore, a comprehensive literature review was undertaken, where various papers were reviewed. Of concern were countries located in southern and eastern Africa, but other countries in Africa were also considered. The results showed various socio-economic factors influencing the adoption of biogas in Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Uganda, Rwanda, Tanzania, Mozambique, and Nigeria. However, the most common ones were lack of awareness, low income of the households, and high capital costs. These results are in line with the findings of this study, except that at Lizulu Market the majority of the households (i.e., 99%) showed willingness to try biogas on the condition that the biogas is affordable (i.e., based on their monthly income) and accessible.

Table 4. Socio-economic factors influencing the adoption of biogas in other countries in the region and Africa.

Biogas Adoption Status in Various Countries in Africa	Country	Author
The adoption rate has been very slow in Ethiopia; distance to firewood sources negatively affects the adoption of biogas; having access to electricity in a community negatively impacts biogas adoption; low education levels limit biogas adoption because of a lack of understanding of the socio-economic and environmental benefits of biogas; demographic compositions and social factors significantly affect biogas adoption; and the high cost of biogas technology and low income of the households.	Ethiopia	[6,29,35,36]
Regardless of the multiple benefits of using biogas, adoption in Kenya is very low. Generally, people lack a full understanding of the benefits of biogas, and the availability of cheaper sources of cooking and heating fuel, such as firewood, charcoal, and kerosene, negatively affects biogas adoption, and the high cost of biogas technology negatively affects biogas adoption.	Kenya	[37]
The negative perception of the community about biogas. Others consider biogas as not safe, while others think that biogas generated from cow dung is dirt and, as such cannot be used for cooking. The technology is less affordable for rural households that rely on low and seasonal income. Additionally, inadequate technical expertise in biogas technology is playing a key role in hindering the uptake of biogas.	Malawi	[7,9]
The factors that motivate biogas adoption are its smoke-free nature, women and children having more time to engage in other development activities, and reduced time spent on cooking. However, more awareness is needed; high costs of biogas technology, thus requiring government subsidies to increase its adoption.	Uganda	[4]
A low level of education is hampering the adoption of biogas in South Africa because of the lack of understanding of its benefits; some households are aware of biogas, but they want to learn more about technical aspects of the technology. This indicates that there is a lack of a full understanding of biogas, and due to a lack of awareness, some think that using biogas is dangerous. In addition, the high initial capital cost of biogas hinders the uptake of biogas technology, and this is exacerbated by the challenge of low income of households.	South Africa	[23,38]
Fear of change, and as a result, households are unwilling to transition to biogas from traditional cooking fuels, and a low level of literacy in the villages hinders the awareness of biogas; and capital cost remains a bottleneck to biogas adoption, and there is a need to introduce financial incentives.	Nigeria	[39]
Fear of transition from cooking the traditional way and social, cultural, and religious objections to using animal or human waste hinders biogas adoption; higher income levels contribute to increased adoption of biogas.	Rwanda and Tanzania	[40]
Households prefer cooking with a firewood stove instead of a biogas stove; social/cultural/religious/health resistance or objection to handling or using animal or human waste for biogas production; low literacy levels make the adoption of the technology more difficult, and lack of awareness about the technology and its potential benefits prevents biogas adoption; and low income of the households contribute to low adoption of biogas.	Mozambique	[18]

shows factors that influence biogas adoption in various countries in the region and Africa.

4. Discussion

4.1. Prospects of Biogas Cooking Adoption by Households

4.1.1. Lack of Cleaner and Alternative Cooking Fuels

Only 4% of the population in rural areas have access to electricity in Malawi, and at Lizulu Market only 1% of the households use electricity for cooking. Other alternative sources of cooking energy, such as LPG, are not accessible and used for cooking. Generally, there are limited cooking options; thus, households are forced to choose from the dirty fuels they have. This explains why 99% of the households cited biomass in the form of charcoal and firewood as their first cooking choice. It was observed that agricultural waste was only used as a last resort, mainly when households did not have money to purchase charcoal and firewood. Thus, the use of agricultural waste is not a choice but a means for survival. One participant said, “Whenever I have money, I go to Lizulu Market to purchase firewood and charcoal. However, when I do not have money, I go to my farm and collect agricultural waste for cooking and heating”. Another participant during the FGD said, “These maize stalks are not efficient; you need large quantities of them to cook a meal”. This confirms the narrative that says that households are forced to choose a better fuel out of the dirty cooking options at Lizulu Market. The lack of cleaner and alternative cooking fuels creates a suitable environment for stakeholders to promote the uptake of biogas.

4.1.2. The Growing Scarcity and Rising Cost of Traditional Cooking Fuels

Due to deforestation, traditional cooking fuels are becoming scarce and expensive. The respondents acknowledged the increasing difficulty in sourcing firewood and the rising cost of charcoal. During the FGDs, one woman remarked, “Every year, it gets harder to find firewood, and the price of charcoal keeps increasing. We need another option, but we don’t know what else we can use”. Women who do not have money are forced to walk long distances to collect firewood, where they are exposed to sexual exploitation and harassment. For example, one woman remarked, “We wake up early in the morning to collect firewood, spending more than two hours every day”. Another woman during the FGD said, “In the past, maize stalks were collected from any farm here because they were not valued by the owners. Not this time; you only collect from your farm”. This signifies that traditional cooking fuels in the long term will not be available due to sustainability issues. The community has been experiencing an increase in the cost of charcoal and firewood, making these fuels less affordable. One respondent said, “Look at this bundle of firewood. It used to cost USD 0.96 a week ago; now it is USD 1.34. Many are not buying now, but they will get used to this”. Thus, this creates an opportunity for the adoption of biogas. However, there is a need to consider the adoption of innovative models for delivering the biogas to ensure that it is more competitive against traditional cooking fuels.

4.1.3. A Strong Desire to Embrace New Cooking Technologies Regardless of Household Income

The results showed that 94% of the respondents were interested in learning more about cooking using biogas at Lizulu Market. This did not come as a surprise because only 38 respondents reported having heard about biogas. It was observed that 99% of the respondents were willing to try biogas for cooking as long as it is affordable. During the FGD, one woman remarked, “I am ready to use biogas for cooking as long as its price is not higher than that of firewood and charcoal”. During the FGDs, LPG was also mentioned as an alternative, but many found it too expensive and expressed safety concerns. Biogas was considered as a potential solution, but concerns about its availability, reliability, and initial setup costs were raised. However, inaccessibility of biogas was cited by 97% of the households as the main challenge that may contribute to low adoption of biogas. On the other hand, only 3% of the respondents cited lack of money, and none mentioned cultural belief as an obstacle to biogas adoption. The study also investigated the ability and willingness to pay for biogas by the households. The average income was determined to be USD 67 per month, and based on this income, 66% of the households indicated their willingness to pay for biogas using cash, while the remaining 34% preferred buying the biogas on credit. However, this was dependent on the price of the biogas. On average, the respondents were willing to pay USD 3.5 per week (i.e., USD 14/month). However, at the time of the study, these households were spending USD 7.6 on charcoal per month and USD 5.7 on firewood, which were lower than what they were willing to spend on biogas per month. These results indicate that households want a cleaner cooking fuel that is accessible and affordable. However, there is a need to adopt innovative financing ways, such as Results-Based Financing (RBF), Asset-Backed Leasing, Blended Finance Models, Village Savings and Loan Associations (VSLAs) Biogas Loans, Carbon Finance Integration, and Pay-As-You-Go (PAYG), to enable households to adopt biogas systems regardless of their income.

The results of this study may reflect what is happening in many other rural areas of Malawi. For example, the results of this study are in line with findings of various studies conducted in the country, where different authors have reported that biomass remains the first cooking option for households (i.e., biomass accounting for 99% of the energy needs) [1]. This shows that limited access to clean energy sources is a common challenge, especially in rural areas. Therefore, just like in Lizulu, many households in many other rural communities do not have alternative options, thus making biomass in the form of charcoal, firewood, and agriculture their first choice by default. All they are supposed to do is choose the best out of the available dirty fuels. Additionally, the average monthly income in Lizulu (i.e., USD 67) is in line with findings of other similar studies in Malawi. For instance, the national statistics reported that 70% of the population are living on less than USD 2.15 per day (i.e., USD 64.5 per month) [41]. This means that regardless of having or not having access to clean and alternative energy, many people in the rural areas will continue to struggle due to financial limitations. However, awareness and willingness to learn and use biogas may differ depending on the geographical area because of cultural and religious beliefs. Thus, there is a need to promote biogas awareness in most rural areas, considering that the technology is not widely developed. The awareness campaigns may also address the common challenge of waste management in markets that do not have access to waste management services.

4.2. Constraints to Biogas Cooking Adoption by Households

4.2.1. Cooking Energy Decision Making Process Hindering Biogas Adoption

The decision-making process plays a key role in determining the cooking energy choices at households at Lizulu Market, which can be attributed to cultural beliefs. In total, male household members were responsible for the provision of money for cooking in 63% of the households interviewed. However, once the money was provided, female household members were responsible for purchasing the cooking fuel in the majority of the households (i.e., 81%). This shows that men played a major role in cooking energy choices regardless of women taking the responsibility of searching and buying the cooking fuel. Women, who are burdened with searching for cooking fuel and cooking, will buy a certain type of cooking fuel depending on the amount of money provided by the male household members, who do not have a better understanding of the challenges that these women face. This arrangement does not favor women and may present a major challenge to transitioning to cleaner cooking fuels, such as biogas. This explains why the majority of the respondents (i.e., 49%) wanted just to try using biogas because it was something new and strange to them when they were asked to mention the reasons for their willingness to use biogas for cooking. Moreover, the majority of the respondents were male (73%), who happened to be the heads of the households. This meant that their motivation for trying to use biogas for cooking was not driven by the understanding of the challenges associated with dirty fuels.

4.2.2. Households Positive Perceptions Towards Dirty Fuels

The study findings show that households will choose the best cooking fuel options from what they know and what is available in their community. Currently, out of the dirty cooking fuels they have, they choose charcoal as the best option, and they consider firewood as an option that is better than agricultural waste. This is also evidenced by the study findings, where 99% of the respondents indicated that biomass in the form of charcoal and firewood was their first choice. This is in line with the findings of many similar studies that found that biomass accounts for more than 90% of the cooking fuel in rural areas of Malawi [11,13,15]. At Lizulu Market, only 1% of the households interviewed regarded electricity as the first cooking energy option, yet it is estimated that 4% of the population in rural areas have access to grid electricity [42]. Generally, the use of electricity for cooking is low by those connected to the grid in Malawi, both in rural and urban areas, because many people believe that cooking using electricity is expensive. However, between charcoal and firewood, the majority of the respondents at Lizulu (i.e., 75%) preferred using charcoal. The respondents reported that charcoal is more efficient when compared with firewood and agricultural waste. In addition, charcoal is easier to store, transport, and use than firewood and charcoal. On the other hand, firewood is considered to be much better than agricultural waste because of the same efficiency and ease of use reasons. When asked about the reliability of the cooking fuels they mostly use or prefer, only 10% indicated firewood and charcoal are unreliable. However, their responses were based on what cooking fuels they know; as such, they were unable to compare these fuels with modern cooking technologies. One participant said, “Firewood and charcoal are reliable because they are available, and cooking is done very fast, unlike agricultural waste”. Another participant said, “You can access charcoal and firewood at any time here at Lizulu Market, as long as you have money”. This meant that accessibility to them made the fuel reliable. However, this accessibility is affected by the price of the cooking fuel and the household’s income.

4.2.3. Lack of Awareness and Understanding of Biogas

Lizulu Market has a 40 m² biogas plant that is operated using a social enterprise model, and the plant supplies biogas to a few households and businesses using biogas backpacks. The users are required to pay a fee for the biogas supplied. In addition, the plant produces biofertilizer that is sold to farmers. Its strategic location enables the operators to collect organic waste generated in large quantities for biogas production. In addition, locating the biogas plant at the market that is frequented by many people throughout the day helps to increase biogas awareness. Regardless of this, the study findings showed that only 38% of the respondents were aware of biogas, but it was evident that most of them did not understand the benefits of using biogas over other cooking fuels available. Moreover, it was determined that 79% of the respondents had never used biogas before. During the FGD, one woman said, “I have just heard that a biogas plant is being constructed here at Lizulu Market, but I do not know exactly how the technology works”. Therefore, the study results show that biogas awareness was very low. For example, during the FGDs one participant stated, “I have heard about biogas, but I always thought it was only for big companies or schools. I never imagined it could be used in homes like ours”. Cultural cooking practices played a significant role in fuel choices. Some participants worried that biogas might not produce enough heat for certain meals, especially those requiring long cooking times, such as beans or traditional stews. One participant remarked, “We cook large meals, and some foods need a strong fire to cook well. Can biogas really handle that?” In addition, when asked about why they want to try using biogas, the majority of them (i.e., 49%) were just fascinated by a new cooking technology but not its benefits, and another 2% reported that they are not willing to use biogas for cooking. This does not come as a surprise because the majority of the respondents (73%) were males, who do not understand the challenge associated with collecting and cooking using dirty fuels. This is worsened by the fact that males are responsible for providing money for cooking fuel purchases for the majority of the households at Lizulu Market (i.e., 63% of the households).

4.2.4. Low Education Levels and Low Income

Low education levels of the family heads do not only hinder biogas adoption because of a lack of understanding of its benefits but also reduce their chances of getting formal employment in Malawi. The study findings showed that only 6% of the respondents had full employment at Lizulu Market. In addition, this challenge is exacerbated by Malawi’s weak economy that generates few jobs for the growing population, where many young people compete for the few employment opportunities available. Inability to obtain employment also plays a key role in limiting the economic opportunities of households. The income of the household is one of the important factors that can affect cooking energy options. Usually, households will settle for a cooking energy source that is available for free or at an affordable price [28]. Sustainable Development Goal Seven (SDG 7), Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL), and the 2018 National Energy Policy focus on energy affordability as a means for improving energy access. Simply put, this means energy accessibility is incomplete without consideration for affordability. Households in Lizulu, too, are expected to settle for cooking energy options that they can afford. In this study, the average income per month for the household was USD 67.00. Lizulu is mostly rural, where the cost of living is expected to be lower when compared to urban settings. This does not come as a surprise because at the national level it is estimated that 70% of the population earn under USD 1.90 per day and another 22% under USD 0.20 [1]. However, rising costs of farm inputs, such as fertilizer, contribute to food insecurity in Malawi. Eventually, a high inflation rate affects both urban and rural areas. An average income of USD 67.00 per month for households with an average occupancy of 4.6 people is not adequate to support basic needs, such as housing, food, water, and energy. Therefore, households are expected to have limited cooking energy options. For instance, a user who seeks to transition to LPG for cooking in Malawi initially is supposed to spend about USD 60, which is almost equal to what households earn per month in Lizulu. In this case, regardless of increased awareness about the advantages of cooking with LPG, it will be difficult for most households to transition to such clean cooking fuel [1,10].

4.3. A Comparison Socio-Economic Impacts on Biogas in Regional Countries and Africa

The results of this study are in line with findings of similar studies conducted in other regional countries and Africa, such as Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi, Nigeria, Mozambique, Uganda, Rwanda, and South Africa, where low adoption rates were reported. The major socio-economic challenges that contribute to low adoption of biogas were low levels of education, lack of awareness and understanding of the biogas technology and its benefits, low income of households, and negative perceptions towards biogas use because some believe that it is not safe to use. However, at Lizulu, the results showed that households had some positive perceptions towards biogas, which is contrary to the study findings of ref [9] in Malawi, ref [40] in Rwanda and Tanzania, and ref [39] in Nigeria. Generally, the majority of the households (i.e., 99%) wanted to learn more about biogas and try to use it for cooking if given an opportunity (i.e., assuming that biogas is affordable) to try biogas for cooking. This positive response signified a mindset change after enumerators explained the technology to the households that were not familiar with the technology. This was not the case in some other countries, where it was reported that fear of change and unwillingness of the households to transition to biogas from traditional cooking fuels contributed to the adoption of biogas, which could be a result of lack of knowledge about biogas. However, lack of awareness, low household income, and the high cost of biogas technology remain the common challenges that hinder biogas adoption in all the countries, including at Lizulu Market in Malawi.

5. Conclusions

This study was undertaken to investigate the opportunities and barriers related to the socio-economic status of the households at Lizulu Market and the potential for the adoption of biogas cooking fuel. Quantitative data were collected through a household survey, where households were targeted. In addition, qualitative data were collected, where participants were asked various questions related to cooking fuel options and biogas. The study findings showed that the major opportunities for biogas adoption were scarcity and rising cost of traditional cooking fuels, the willingness of the households to try using biogas for cooking, and the willingness to learn more about this alternative cooking fuel. The constraints to biogas adoption were determined to be low awareness and lack of understanding of biogas technology, as evidenced by the study results where most of the respondents indicated that charcoal and firewood are their preferred cooking options because they are reliable. They showed willingness to try biogas only after enumerators explained the biogas technology, its benefits and disadvantages, and the low income levels of the households, which may hinder the adoption of biogas regardless of their willingness to transition from dirty cooking fuels. Low educations levels not only exacerbate the challenge of biogas awareness but also their economic opportunities because family heads are unable to secure employment. With limited income, it will be difficult for many households to transition from traditional cooking fuels to biogas and other alternative cooking fuels regardless of showing interest in biogas. These results may reflect what actually is happening in many other similar areas in Malawi because the situation in terms of lack of access to clean and modern energy and household income is not much different. However, there could be some differences in different locations partly due to cultural and religious beliefs and interventions made to increase the awareness of clean and alternative energy through various projects in targeted areas. Therefore, more studies are needed, where some areas should be targeted because of variations in cultural and religious beliefs and levels of awareness of clean cooking technologies. On the other hand, when compared with other countries in the region, the contributing factors to low biogas adoption are the same, but in Lizulu the households showed interest in trying biogas for cooking, which should be an entry point for stakeholders to promote biogas adoption.