We examine if social and economic factors, fuelwood availability, market and media access are associated with owning a modified stove and variation in household emissions from biomass combustion, a significant environmental and health concern in rural India. We analyze cross-sectional household socio-economic data, and PM(2.5) and particulate surface area concentration in household emissions from cookstoves (n=100). This data set combines household social and economic variables with particle emissions indexes associated with the household stove. The data are from the Foundation for Ecological Society, India, from a field study of household emissions. In our analysis, we find that less access to ready and free fuelwood and higher wealth are associated with owning a replacement/modified stove. We also find that additional kitchen ventilation is associated with a 12% reduction in particulate emissions concentration (p<0.05), after we account for the type of stove used. We did not find a significant association between replacement/modified stove on household emissions when controlling for additional ventilation. Higher wealth and education are associated with having additional ventilation. Social caste, market and media access did not have any effect on the presence of replacement or modified stoves or additional ventilation. While the data available to us does not allow an examination of direct health outcomes from emissions variations, adverse environmental and health impacts of toxic household emissions are well established elsewhere in the literature. The value of this study is in its further examination of the role of social and economic factors and available fuelwood from commons in type of stove use, and additional ventilation, and their effect on household emissions. These associations are important since the two direct routes to improving household air quality among the poor are stove type and better ventilation.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 December 2012.
All research outputs
#23,294,844
of 34,358,242 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#143,464
of 224,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,000
of 229,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,165
of 4,800 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,358,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 229,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,800 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
