AQMx Sectoral Guidance: Expanding Access to E-Cooking

Approximately one-quarter of the world’s population—about 2.1 billion people—still rely on polluting fuels such as firewood, charcoal, coal, and kerosene for daily cooking (WHO, 2024). Reliance on these fuels exposes millions to dangerous levels of fine particulate matter (PM2.5), black carbon (BC), methane (CH4), carbon monoxide (CO), and other pollutants, driving major health, climate, and gender inequities. Despite global commitments under SDG7, current trajectories indicate that 1.7–1.8 billion people will still lack clean cooking access by 2030 (ESMAP, 2025). Around 730 million people remain without electricity, with only modest progress expected by 2030 (IEA, 2025).

Over half of those who primarily use biomass (e.g., firewood, charcoal, crop residues, and animal dung) for cooking are already connected to the electricity grid but lack the appliances or means to cook with electricity. At the same time, grid expansion and mini-grid deployment have accelerated across many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with electricity access rising far faster than clean cooking access. This creates an unprecedented opportunity to expand electric cooking (e-cooking) access.

The continued use of polluting fuels undermines progress on health, air quality, gender equality, and climate mitigation. Expanding access to affordable, reliable e-cooking represents a timely opportunity to close this gap and accelerate national development goals. 

Cooking with polluting fuels remains a major source of household air pollution (HAP) and ambient air pollution as well as a significant contributor to global temperature rise.

Emissions of greenhouse gases and short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs)

Roughly 1 gigaton (GT) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) is emitted annually from woodfuel combustion alone—totaling about 2% of global emissions (CCA, n.d.). Household combustion of solid fuels and kerosene accounts for nearly 50% of global anthropogenic BC emissions, making the household energy sector one of the world’s largest singles sources of BC worldwide (CEDS, 2021). Incomplete combustion also produces CH4, contributing over 4% of global anthropogenic CH4 emissions (IEA, 2025).

Emissions of air pollutants

Beyond BC and CH4, polluting cooking fuels emit high levels of PM2.5, CO, nitrogen oxides (NOₓ); polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), and, in some settings, trace heavy metals. Many of these pollutants contribute directly to ambient air pollution: PM2.5, BC, and PAHs increase particulate concentrations, while CO, NOₓ, and NMVOCs drive ground-level ozone formation. Household energy is responsible for approximately 20% of global PM2.5 exposure (Chowdhury et al., 2023; McDuffie et al., 2021). 

Impacts on public health

Exposure to HAP from polluting cooking fuels is one of the leading environmental health risks worldwide, leading to an estimated 2.9 million premature deaths each year, including more than 230,000 children under five years old (WHO, 2024; HEI, 2025). Smoke from polluting fuel use is linked to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), stroke, ischemic heart disease, lung cancer, cataracts, tuberculosis, type 2 diabetes, and adverse pregnancy outcomes, with women and young children experiencing the highest levels of exposure (WHO, 2024).

Impacts on ecosystems and agriculture

Heavy dependence on fuelwood places severe pressure on ecosystems. About 50% of global wood harvested for energy is used for cooking, with the share being closer to 90% in Africa (FAO, 2024). This drives forest degradation, leads to biodiversity loss, and harms natural carbon sinks. In addition, ozone formed from NOₓ and VOCs—including CH4—reduces yields of major staple crops (Tai et al., 2021), undermining food security.

Impacts on the economy

HAP-related illness generates more than USD 526 billion in annual economic losses, with an additional USD 226 billion lost due to the time women and girls spend collecting fuel (AFREC, 2024). Continued use of polluting fuels has substantial negative impacts on economic development. 

Clean air and mitigation of near-term warming

By replacing polluting fuels, e-cooking sharply reduces emissions of BC, CH4, PM2.5, CO, and other pollutants that drive near-term warming and harm household and ambient air quality. Because BC persists in the atmosphere for only days to weeks, reductions in BC generate fast, measurable improvements (CEDS, 2021). These benefits are strongest when e-cooking substantially displaces wood and charcoal. The climate benefit of transitioning to e-cooking also depends on how electricity is generated. On fossil fuel-heavy grids, overall emissions may be similar to LPG or natural gas; however, as grids decarbonize and decentralized renewable energy expands, e-cooking becomes a significantly lower-emission option, reinforcing its long-term climate value.

Public health improvement and protection of ecosystems

Cleaner air reduces deaths and illnesses from respiratory and cardiovascular disease. Universal access to clean cooking could avoid over 4.7 million premature deaths between now and 2040 in Africa alone (IEA, 2025). Lower fuelwood and charcoal use also curbs forest degradation and protects natural carbon sinks (FAO, 2024).

Gender equity

Women and girls—who face the highest exposure to smoke as well as injuries from unclean cooking—benefit directly from cleaner cooking options and experience major time savings from spending less time collecting fuel or tending fires. This can enable increased education, income generation activities, and community participation (CCA, n.d.). 

Baseline assessment when local data are available

Policymakers should compile national or subnational datasets describing household, institutional (e.g., schools, prisons), and commercial (e.g., restaurants, food vendors) cooking patterns, emissions, health outcomes, and electricity access. Baseline mapping should highlight distinct user groups, each requiring tailored e-cooking approaches.

Key data types include:

Population and household characteristics: primary, secondary, and stacked cooking fuels; appliance ownership; household size and income distributions (National Statistical Offices (NSOs), Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), Living Standards Measurement Study (LSMS), WHO Harmonized Survey Questions for Household Energy).

Energy access and reliability: grid and mini-grid coverage; outage frequency and timing; tariff structures and lifeline blocks; utility financial performance; urbanization trends; charcoal reliance despite grid access. National electrification or least-cost expansion plans should be reviewed to understand future availability and alignment with e-cooking demand.

Air pollution data: concentrations of PM2.5, PM10, CO, black carbon (if available) from local air quality monitoring networks; emissions of PM2.5, PM10, CH4, CO, black carbon (if available) from local or national emissions inventory; source apportionment studies.

Health data: exposure levels, respiratory and cardiovascular disease incidence, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and vulnerability indicators (Ministries of Health, WHO). The WHO AirQ+ tool can be used to quantify health burdens of air pollution. 

Conduct baseline analysis and scenario modeling

Map current fuel and technology mixes—emphasizing widespread fuel stacking, which affects real-world exposure and achievable health and climate benefits—alongside electricity availability and appliance ownership. Use nationally representative datasets (World Bank EnergyData.Info platform, DHS) and emissions inventories to estimate the household energy contribution to PM2.5, BC, CH4, and CO.

Scenario modeling can project emission reductions, avoided DALYs, system impacts, and household cost savings under different e-cooking pathways. Models should incorporate suppressed demand by estimating needs under conditions of adequate, reliable electricity and appliance access. Free or open-access tools such as the LEAP model, ABODE, GAINS, the World Bank Global Electrification Platform (GEP) can be used to develop these scenarios.

Baseline assessment when local data are limited

Where national statistics or inventories are incomplete, policymakers can draw on global datasets and proxy indicators:

Energy: IEA World Energy Outlook (2025), World Bank Multi-Tier Framework (MTF)

Air pollution: global emission inventories such as EDGAR and CEDS can help estimating emissions from the household energy sector. Remote sensing data from NASA Earth Observations, TROPOMI or CAMS can provide information on ambient concentrations for PM and other air pollutants.

Cooking energy datasets: Cooking Energy Data Portal

Proxy indicators: biomass reliance, hours of electricity supply, tariff affordability, wood fuel production, forest-cover loss (FAOSTAT, Global Forest Watch)

Global and proxy datasets provide a useful starting point, but countries should work to progressively strengthen national data systems so local statistics replace global proxies. 

AQMx Air Quality Monitoring Guidance

AQMx Source Attribution Guidance

AQMx Emission Inventories Guidance

AQMx Decision Support Guidance

Map stakeholders and mandates

E-cooking operates within a complex ecosystem of social, health, energy, environmental, and economic actors; stakeholder mapping should reflect this complexity. Countries should identify all stakeholders engaged in energy access, air quality management, climate mitigation, health, gender, and finance—building on existing clean cooking or sectoral planning processes where possible. Tools such as the WHO Household Energy Assessment Rapid Tool (HEART) Stakeholder Mapping Template, the UNDP Social and Environmental Standards (SES) Stakeholder Engagement Guidance Note, the UNDP–UNDESA Framework for Assessing Quality of Stakeholder Engagement, and others can provide a standardized framework to clarify roles, responsibilities, and influence.

A comprehensive map may include:

• Government: Ministries of Energy, Environment, Health, Finance/Treasury, Gender, Local Government, Agriculture; electricity regulators and utilities; standards bureaus; national statistical and planning offices.
• Private sector: Manufacturers, importers, distributors, mini-grid and Pay-As-You-Go (PAYGo) companies, Savings and Credit Cooperative Organizations (SACCOs) and microfinance institutions, and technical service providers.
• Civil society: Women’s cooperatives, consumer associations, community-based organizations, and advocacy groups.
• Research and academia: Universities and technical centers.
• Development partners: Bilateral and multilateral agencies, foundations, international non-governmental organizations (INGOs), and global initiatives.

Establish a coordination platform

Form or expand a national Clean Cooking/E-Cooking Task Force to guide roadmap development, oversee technical working groups, integrate e-cooking into national strategies (e.g., nationally determined contributions (NDCs), SLCP plans), and ensure data sharing and joint reporting across institutions.

Secure political endorsement

Ministerial decrees, inter-ministerial memorandum, and/or inclusion in climate and energy strategies can help anchor long-term commitment and financing.

Coordinate between national and local governments

Vertical coordination ensures local authorities, utilities, and community organizations can tailor national policies to local contexts. Municipal governments can lead institutional kitchen conversions and community engagement, while civil society representation ensures inclusivity and continuous feedback throughout planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation (M&E). 

Set clear goals and targets

Baseline findings should guide measurable, time-bound targets at national and subnational levels. Targets must reflect priorities across air quality, climate mitigation, public health, gender equity, and electricity system readiness, and should involve all relevant ministries, regulators, utilities, and development partners. Where targets already exist—such as in NDCs, National SLCP Plans, or clean cooking strategies—e-cooking targets should reinforce rather than duplicate them. WHO CHEST and UNDP Climate Promise guidance offer practical methods for defining context-appropriate household energy goals and estimating potential benefits.

Targets should be grounded in realistic modelling, drawing on electrification projections, IEA Universal Access scenarios, grid-readiness assessments, and feasible market development trajectories.

Examples include:

• Expanding e-cooking to a defined share of electrified households (e.g., 50% by 2030).
• Reducing household PM2.5 and BC emissions by 40%.
• Converting a defined share of electrified institutional kitchens (schools, hospitals, correctional facilities).
• Increasing uptake of efficient electric pressure cookers (EPCs) among grid-connected households.

Institutional kitchens and productive use enterprises (restaurants, vendors, and small food businesses) should be early priorities in planning and design, given their predictable loads and potential to anchor electricity demand.

Define technical standards and ensure quality assurance

High-quality, safe, and efficient appliances are essential for consumer trust. Governments should adopt or adapt minimum performance, safety, and efficiency standards, referencing IEC standards. Standards should address power rating, thermal efficiency, durability, and electrical safety under low-voltage or unstable grid conditions. These requirements should be based on applicable international standards to ensure interoperability, safety, and market consistency.

National standards bureaus or energy agencies should establish laboratory testing capacity and, where feasible, field-testing programs, or collaborate with Regional Testing and Knowledge Centers (RTKCs). Because durability data for many e-cooking appliances remain limited, warranty systems, repair networks, and consumer protection mechanisms are critical. Energy-efficiency labels and clear certification requirements can also help consumers identify high-quality products.

Synchronize policy and power-system planning

E-cooking planning must be tightly integrated with cooking energy behavior as well as electricity sector development. Generation, transmission, and distribution planning should anticipate increased cooking loads, account for urban–rural differences, and incorporate peak-demand patterns. Tariff structures should balance affordability with cost recovery and transparently document distributional impacts.

Utilities can deploy demand-management measures—such as smart meters, time-of-use tariffs, and demand-response programs—to optimize system performance. Climate benefits are maximized when rising cooking-related electricity demand is paired with renewable energy expansion, energy efficiency improvements, and least-cost power sector planning. In mini-grid or off-grid areas, planners should assess capacity constraints and consider targeted upgrades such as storage or load management systems.

Estimate costs and financing responsibilities

Planners should estimate capital and operational needs—including grid reinforcement, household wiring upgrades, appliance procurement, consumer finance mechanisms, data systems, communications, and capacity building.

Financing responsibilities typically include:

• Government: national budgets, targeted subsidies, import-duty exemptions, social-protection linkages, and tariff design frameworks that protect low-income consumers.
• Private sector: manufacturing, distribution, appliance financing, quality assurance, and carbon finance participation.
• Development partners: concessional loans, results-based financing (RBF) mechanisms, technical assistance, and early-stage pilots.

Mobilize the private sector and build market readiness

Manufacturers, distributors, utilities, appliance financiers, and local enterprises should help identify supply chain gaps, opportunities for local assembly, and needed incentives. Governments and partners can also strengthen repair networks, support investor due diligence requirements, and guide firms through carbon finance methodologies.

Assign responsibilities and develop an implementation roadmap

A lead ministry (typically Energy) should oversee implementation with support from the national Task Force. Oversight should incorporate health, gender, and equity considerations. Indicators should measure both access and actual use—frequency and duration of e-cooking, displacement of polluting fuels, and associated emissions reductions. Where appropriate, countries may apply metered-use methodologies such as the Gold Standard Metered & Measured Energy Cooking Devices approach. 

At the national level

E-cooking should be embedded across national energy, electrification, air quality, and climate policies to ensure coherence and reinforce the broader clean cooking agenda. National frameworks should clearly designate the ministry or agency responsible for clean cooking—typically Energy or Environment—while ensuring e-cooking targets complement, rather than replace, efforts to scale other clean fuels and technologies.

Working through the national E-Cooking Task Force, ministries of Energy, Environment, Finance, Health, and Gender should:

• Embed e-cooking measures in electrification and integrated resource plans, ensuring generation and distribution planning accounts for future cooking demand and, in colder climates, clean heating needs.
• Incorporate e-cooking into NDCs, National SLCP Action Plans, and Clean Air Action Plans, highlighting dual health–climate benefits.
• Enact or strengthen appliance-performance, safety, and efficiency standards—referencing IEC standards—and mandate enforcement through standards authorities and regulators.
• Build sustainable testing and certification capacity via national labs or regional testing centers.
• Introduce fiscal and financial incentives such as import-duty exemptions, tax rebates, or results-based subsidies to increase appliance affordability.
• Institutionalize cross-ministerial coordination, shared reporting, and budget alignment.

High-level political endorsement—such as inclusion of e-cooking in the National Energy Policy or Climate Change Act—can help to secure long-term institutional backing and facilitates donor investment.

At the local level

Municipal and provincial governments can reinforce national frameworks by integrating e-cooking into local clean air, energy, and development plans. Local authorities may adopt ordinances or incentives—such as tariff adjustments for low-income users, appliance rebates, or procurement requirements for schools, hospitals, and canteens. Coordination between national and local governments ensures implementation is responsive to local contexts while maintaining national standards and consistent monitoring. 

Performance and safety standards

Governments should adopt or adapt minimum performance, safety, and efficiency standards for e-cooking appliances, referencing international norms such as minimum energy performance standards (MEPS), electrical safety requirements, and national appliance efficiency or clean cooking frameworks. Standards should address power-rating ranges, thermal efficiency, electrical safety, and durability under local grid conditions. They should also apply to second-hand or refurbished electric appliances, which are increasingly exported to LMICs; import controls, compliance documentation, and coordinated market surveillance mechanisms can help prevent unsafe or low-quality products from entering informal markets.

National standards bureaus, in collaboration with energy and environment ministries, should establish testing and certification systems—through national labs or RTKCs—to verify compliance before importation or market entry.

Labeling, quality assurance, and consumer protection

Introduce energy-efficiency and safety labeling to help consumers easily distinguish high-quality, certified appliances from low-quality or unsafe products. Develop after-sales and maintenance guidelines, ensuring that distributors provide warranties, service centers, and technician training. Governments can strengthen this ecosystem by integrating appliance repair and electrical safety training into vocational schools, technical colleges, and national jobs programs. These measures foster public trust and increase the lifespan and cost-effectiveness of appliances.

Electricity-tariff and grid regulations

Regulators should review tariff structures to support affordable e-cooking while maintaining utility viability (for example, through lifeline tariffs, time-of-use pricing, or targeted subsidies). Some regulators have introduced e-cooking-specific tariffs (such as the Uganda Electricity Regulatory Authority’s dedicated Cooking Tariff) which offer reduced rates during key cooking hours to support affordability and encourage households to shift from biomass to electricity. Tariff reforms must balance cost recovery with household affordability and include measures that reduce incentives for unsafe or informal connections, such as streamlined legal connection processes or subsidized fees. Integrating e-cooking demand forecasts—and, in colder climates, additional heating loads—into electricity planning and reliability standards helps prevent grid overloads and maintain service quality. 

Households and communities

Public campaigns should highlight convenience, safety, cost savings, and health benefits. Real-life testimonials—such as families using EPCs, infrared or coil stoves, or induction stoves—help normalize adoption. (Where induction stoves are promoted, communication should also highlight the need for induction-compatible cookware.) Partners such as women’s cooperatives, local influencers, and community leaders can use radio, demonstrations, and local-language materials to build trust. Programs like CLEAN-Air (Africa) show the effectiveness of community-embedded communication channels. Tools such as MECS eCookbooks help adapt traditional dishes for electric appliances.

Institutions and service providers

Schools, hospitals, and public kitchens can act as demonstration sites. Training for cooks, facility managers, and procurement officers can increase confidence and sustained use. Civil servants and health workers can be early adopters, especially where installment payments can be deducted from salaries.

Policymakers and private sector

Policy briefs, webinars, and dialogues can strengthen understanding of e-cooking’s air-quality, climate, and economic co-benefits. Private-sector actors—such as appliance manufacturers, utilities, and microfinance institutions—should be engaged early through joint communication platforms and public–private forums to align messages and expectations.

Media and general public

Engage journalists through press releases, story pitches, and study tours that highlight human stories behind clean-cooking transitions. National campaigns using TV, social media, and influencers can elevate e-cooking as a symbol of modern, healthy living. 

At the national level

National governments create the enabling conditions for large-scale e-cooking adoption. This includes anticipating tariff reforms and designing mitigation strategies—such as targeted subsidies, social protection schemes, or lifeline blocks—to ensure that e-cooking remains affordable as electricity tariffs move toward cost-reflective levels.

• Energy and electrification planning: Integrate e-cooking into national energy and electrification plans so that grid expansion and mini-grid programs account for cooking loads. Power sector planners should anticipate additional household demand and align investments in generation, transmission, and distribution accordingly.
• Appliance standards and market incentives: Operationalize appliance-efficiency and safety standards developed during the policy integration phase. Sustained testing capacity—through well-maintained laboratories and skilled technicians—is essential for market confidence. Governments can simplify import procedures, reduce or remove taxes and duties on compliant appliances, and encourage domestic assembly or manufacturing to lower costs and strengthen local value chains. Decision support tools such as the CCA Clean Cooking Catalog can help identify appropriate appliance technologies based on performance, safety, and usability.
• Programmatic targets and financing: Translate national targets into funded programs using instruments such as RBF, public–private partnerships (PPPs), and climate or carbon finance mechanisms that reward verified emissions reductions. Implementing agencies should have clear budgets and defined responsibilities for procurement, distribution, and awareness campaigns.
• Prioritize institutional kitchens and Productive-Use Enterprises (PUE): Institutional kitchens—schools, hospitals, prisons, public canteens—and productive-use enterprises (PUE) such as restaurants, food vendors, and catering services should be early priorities. These users have predictable, high-volume cooking loads that improve system utilization, strengthen distribution economics, and provide visible demonstrations that build public confidence in e-cooking technologies.
• Training and coordination: National level training should be organized for utilities, local authorities, educational institutions, microfinance institutions, and civil society partners on designing, financing, and monitoring e-cooking programs. Coordination with ministries of finance and gender ensures subsidies, social tariffs, and inclusion measures are well-managed. Partnerships with universities, technical institutes, and training colleges can bolster awareness, deliver behavior-change communication (BCC), and grow a long-term professional workforce for e-cooking deployment.

At the local level

Local authorities translate national plans into community-level implementation.

• Infrastructure and service delivery: Collaborate with utilities and mini-grid operators to reinforce networks, install smart meters, and ensure reliable, safe power for cooking.
• Market facilitation and consumer access: Partner with appliance distributors, women’s cooperatives, and microfinance institutions to provide on-bill financing, PAYGo models, or revolving credit schemes. Community-led pilots, gender-balanced implementation teams, and localized governance structures can help build ownership and accountability.
• Appliance distribution and delivery channels: Establish coordinated distribution through certified vendors, utility showrooms, community cooperatives, and institutional procurement frameworks to ensure that high-quality appliances reach households, schools, hospitals, and other facilities safely and affordably.
• Demonstration and outreach: Pilot programs in schools, hospitals, and community centers should showcase appliance performance, reliability, and cost savings. Hands-on household training—including preparation of traditional meals with new technologies—can help to build confidence and sustained use.
• Support Productive-Use Enterprises (PUE): Local governments, utilities, and mini-grid operators should work with restaurants, street vendors, bakeries, tea shops, and other enterprises to pilot e-cooking applications. These businesses visibly demonstrate practicality and cost-effectiveness, generate steady demand that strengthens mini-grid or distribution performance, and accelerate household adoption.
• Monitoring and feedback loops: Local implementers should establish user hotlines, community meetings, and surveys to capture challenges and feedback. Research institutions can evaluate real-world appliance performance, emissions reductions, and health and equity outcomes, informing national monitoring frameworks and future investment decisions.

Partnerships and incentives

Implementation succeeds when the private sector is actively engaged. Governments can provide risk-sharing mechanisms—such as partial credit guarantees or matching funds—to attract appliance companies and financial institutions to underserved markets. Donor programs (e.g., MECS, GIZ EnDev, CCAC) can supply technical assistance, early-stage finance, and support for scale-up pilots. 

Preventive measures

Preventive enforcement begins with clear, transparent regulations and certification requirements for manufacturers, importers, and distributors. National standards authorities should require that all imported or locally produced appliances meet approved safety and efficiency criteria before market entry and offer affordable, reliable testing services. Customs and border agencies can use pre-clearance systems and digital product registries to verify compliance documentation. Utilities and financial institutions should partner only with certified vendors and include appliance safety clauses in financing contracts. Public awareness campaigns can help consumers recognize approved brands and labeling, reducing demand for unsafe or counterfeit products.

Detective measures

Once appliances enter the market, periodic inspections and market surveillance are essential. Regulators and consumer-protection agencies should routinely test retail samples and monitor import data for irregularities. Integrating e-cooking product data into national market information systems enables early detection of substandard appliances, improper tariff practices, or illegal grid connections.

Corrective measures

When violations occur, governments should apply clear and proportionate enforcement actions, including penalties for non-compliant imports, license suspensions, mandatory recalls, and public disclosure of offenders. Regulators should also provide guidance and realistic timelines for corrective action. Institutionalizing these functions within national energy or standards agencies can strengthen consumer confidence and market stability. 

Institutional capacity and mandates

Clear institutional responsibilities should be assigned within key ministries—energy, environment, health, finance, and gender—with permanent technical units or focal points designated for e-cooking. Dedicated budget lines at national and local levels can help to ensure program continuity beyond project cycles.

Regulatory bodies, standards agencies, and utilities should maintain regular training program on:

• Appliance testing, certification, and repair
• Consumer protection and enforcement procedures
• Tariff design and financial modelling
• Monitoring and reporting systems for SLCFs (BC, CH₄, ozone precursors) and health-damaging pollutants (PM2.5, CO, NOₓ, SO₂), alongside GHGs

Technical and operational skills

Training should be tailored to the needs of specific stakeholder groups:

• Government officials and planners: energy modelling, emissions accounting, testing capacity, policy integration
• Utilities and mini-grid operators: grid management, smart-meter data, service reliability
• Manufacturers and distributors: quality control, safety compliance, repair services
• Financial institutions: clean cooking finance instruments, on-bill repayment, credit risk assessment
• Women-led enterprises and cooperatives: appliance sales, after-sales support, repair capacity, spare parts supply, entrepreneurship skills

Networking and peer learning

South–South and peer-to-peer exchanges enable practitioners to share lessons on procurement, financing, and consumer engagement while avoiding common implementation pitfalls. Institutionalizing these exchanges through national training centers, certification programs, or regional partnerships ensures that the e-cooking agenda remains dynamic, locally owned, and continuously improving. 

Key indicators:

• Access and adoption: number and percentage of households or institutions using e-cooking technologies; frequency and duration of use (from surveys, appliance-sales records, and electricity consumption data).
• Energy reliability & performance: grid or mini-grid uptime, appliance reliability, and user satisfaction (utility logs, smart meter analytics, consumer surveys).
• Air quality improvement: reductions in PM2.5, CO and BC from monitoring, inventories or modeling.
• Health outcomes: reductions in HAP exposure, respiratory or cardiovascular symptoms, and modelled DALYs or avoided premature deaths
• Fuel stacking: degree to which polluting fuels continue to be used alongside electricity.
• Household energy costs: appliance affordability and recurring electricity/maintenance costs.
• Ecosystem impacts: changes in fuelwood use, charcoal demand, and deforestation trends.
• Gender and equity impacts: hours saved, women’s participation in enterprises, and benefits reaching low-income, rural, informal, or indigenous households.
• Health and Equity Impact Assessments: explicit documentation of how interventions affect different population groups—recognizing that some programs may initially target “most likely adopters,” but distributional impacts should be assessed, recorded, and transparently communicated.

Institutional responsibilities:

• Ministry of Energy / Electrification Authority: appliance uptake, grid and mini-grid data
• Environmental / Air Quality Management Agency: SLCP and PM2.5 monitoring, inventories, source apportionment
• Ministry of Health: HAP exposure and health surveillance
• National Statistical Office: integration into national household / labor surveys
• Gender Ministry: sex-disaggregated and equity indicators

A national M&E task force should coordinate reporting, ensure coherence across sectors, and support transparent public communication. 

Key no-cost or minimal cost activities

• Integrate e-cooking objectives into ongoing policy and planning processes such as Air Quality Management Plans, Clean Air Action Plans, National SLCP Action Plans, and NDC updates.
• Establish or expand an inter-ministerial Clean Cooking Task Force to align energy, environment, health, finance, and gender agendas.
• Initiate preparatory steps for appliance-safety and efficiency regulations—such as reviewing existing standards, identifying gaps, and coordinating with national standards bodies—recognizing that full standards development and testing capacity require dedicated resources.
• Conduct rapid barrier analyses or stakeholder consultations using data already collected through national energy or demographic surveys.
• Develop communication materials—policy briefs, infographics, or awareness campaigns—through collaboration with existing public-information offices or donor partners.

Financing options

Because these measures mainly require coordination and expertise rather than capital, funding can be drawn from:

• Regular public budget allocations within ministries of energy, health, environment, or gender.
• Technical-assistance programs provided by international partners such as UNEP CCAC, MECS, SEforALL, UNDP or World Bank ESMAP, which often cover staff support, data analysis, and workshop facilitation.
• In-kind contributions—for example, dedicating office space, meeting venues, or existing personnel.
• Development cooperation grants earmarked for planning or policy integration under broader energy-transition initiatives.

Expected outcomes

Even without new capital investment, these actions can deliver significant results:

• Improved institutional coordination and clarity of mandates.
• Early policy coherence between air quality, climate, and electrification objectives.
• Visibility and advocacy gains, helping attract future donors and private investors.

Together, these institutional measures lay the groundwork for scaling up through operational pilots and capital intensive investments. 

Representative operational measures

• Baseline surveys and emissions inventories: Update or expand national datasets on household energy use, electricity reliability, and pollutant emissions to quantify potential BC and CH4 reductions.
• Exposure and health impact monitoring: Conduct targeted HAP measurements or use proxy indicators to estimate health co-benefits.
• Demonstration pilots: Launch limited-scale pilots—for example, introducing EPCs among grid and mini-grid users—to test technical performance, affordability, user acceptance, and real-world cooking patterns. Where feasible, complement pilots with field studies that track exclusive or sustained use, helping to understand stacking behavior and long-term transition potential.
• Consumer awareness and behavior change campaigns: Partner with women’s cooperatives, schools, and media outlets to normalize e-cooking and communicate safety, cost, and time-saving benefits.
• Capacity-building programs: Train local governments, utilities, microfinance institutions, and women-led enterprises on appliance financing, maintenance, and service delivery.

Financing options

Operational measures can draw on blended public and donor finance combining grants, concessional loans, and private contributions:

• RBF: Disburse funds upon verified outputs—such as appliances sold, households connected, or air quality improvements achieved. Carbon finance (in both voluntary and emerging compliance markets) is a specific form of RBF that rewards verified emission reductions from clean cooking transitions.
• PPPs: Enable utilities or local distributors to co-invest in appliance financing schemes, with partial public guarantees to reduce risk.
• Carbon and climate finance: Access voluntary and compliance carbon markets—using approved methodologies—to mobilize performance-based funding for sustained e-cooking adoption.
• Development-cooperation funds: Access programs such as GIZ EnDev, World Bank ESMAP / Clean Cooking Fund (CCF), or the African Development Bank SEFA, which support pilot design, monitoring, and evaluation.
• Domestic co-funding: Allocate small matching grants from national energy or environment budgets to demonstrate government commitment and leverage donor support.

Expected outcomes

Operational measures produce proof of concept—generating data, awareness, and institutional experience to justify larger investments. They also strengthen stakeholder capacity, test financing and delivery models, and create early success stories that accelerate political and market momentum for scale-up. 

Representative high-cost interventions

• Grid and mini-grid reinforcement: Upgrade generation and distribution networks to accommodate additional e-cooking loads, prioritizing reliability and safety. Investments should integrate e-cooking demand forecasts into power sector plans to prevent overloads and outages.
• Appliance subsidy and rebate programs: Introduce targeted financial support for low-income or vulnerable households through direct rebates, social tariff schemes, or bulk procurement of efficient appliances for resale at reduced prices.
• Manufacturing and local assembly incentives: Provide tax relief, concessional loans, working capital facilities, or public–private partnerships to encourage domestic appliance production, reducing import dependence and creating local employment.
• Integration with national electrification and social-protection schemes: Link e-cooking support to ongoing universal access programs, conditional cash transfers, or women’s empowerment initiatives to reach the poorest and most remote populations.

Financing options

A mix of fiscal, international, and private-sector mechanisms can mobilize the scale of resources required:

• National fiscal instruments: Redirect or repurpose fossil fuel subsidies, introduce pollution or carbon taxes, or create dedicated clean energy funds earmarked for e-cooking.
• International climate and development finance: Leverage facilities such as the Green Climate Fund (GCF), Global Environment Facility (GEF), World Bank Clean Cooking Fund (CCF), and African Development Bank SEFA for large-scale programmatic funding.
• Access voluntary or compliance carbon markets—including emerging Article 6 mechanisms—using verified methodologies such as the Gold Standard Methodology for Metered & Measured Energy Cooking Devices (GS 431), the CLEAR methodology, or other internationally recognized certification standards. Carbon crediting activities should be aligned with NDC commitments and integrated into national GHG accounting systems to ensure environmental integrity and avoid double counting. While carbon finance can offer significant co-financing potential, governments should carefully assess market conditions, verification costs, and alignment with national reporting frameworks before relying on these mechanisms as major funding sources.
• Private sector investment: Partner with appliance manufacturers, microfinance institutions, and PAYGo companies to scale financing for consumers, utilities, and distributors. Blended finance models, combining concessional and commercial capital, can improve risk–return profiles and attract private funds.

Expected outcomes

High-cost interventions enable system-wide scale—unlocking the infrastructure, affordability, and market conditions necessary for national e-cooking adoption. These investments strengthen grid and mini-grid reliability, expand appliance access for low-income and remote households, and stimulate domestic manufacturing and service networks. They also create long-term policy and market signals that attract private capital, deepen institutional capacity, and embed e-cooking within national electrification and social protection programs. By anchoring e-cooking in power-sector planning and large-scale subsidy frameworks, high-cost measures deliver the structural foundations needed for sustained, equitable, and climate aligned transitions. 

Disproportionate exposure and impacts

Women and girls spend more time near cooking fires, resulting in significantly higher exposure to fine particulate matter and toxic gases. The World Health Organization estimates that exposure to smoke from polluting fuels contributes to over 2.9 million premature deaths annually (WHO, 2024; HEI, 2025), with women and children accounting for the majority. Exposure leads to a wide range of health effects—including chronic respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, multiple cancers, cataracts, adverse pregnancy outcomes, type 2 diabetes, and tuberculosis—with risks often amplified during pregnancy and at vulnerable life stages across the life course. Meanwhile, the time spent collecting fuel limits education, employment, and leisure opportunities.

E-cooking directly alleviates these burdens. By replacing solid fuels with clean, efficient electric appliances, it eliminates household smoke, reduces burns and injuries, and frees up an estimated two to three hours per day—time that can be redirected toward schooling, paid work, or rest (World Bank, 2020). These health gains are fully realized only when e-cooking substantially replaces polluting fuels; M&E methods are therefore needed to track exclusive or near-exclusive use and verify reductions in HAP exposure.

Data and analysis

Collecting and analyzing sex-disaggregated and intersectional data is crucial to identify who benefits and who may be left behind (CCAC, 2025). Ministries of Energy, Environment, and Gender should jointly monitor differences in appliance ownership, affordability, time use, and income. When local data are missing, practitioners can draw from global sources such as the World Bank Multi-Tier Framework (MTF), Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), and other sources.

Data should also capture intersecting vulnerabilities—such as disability, rural isolation, or informal employment—to design inclusive subsidy and financing schemes.

Targeted action for participation and leadership

Women must be recognized as active agents of the clean cooking transition, not only as beneficiaries. Governments and program implementers should:

• Ensure women’s representation in national and local energy and air quality committees, as well as in e-cooking planning and review workshops.
• Engage women’s cooperatives and community organizations as delivery partners for appliance distribution, awareness raising, and after sales support.
• Provide training and financial support for women-led energy enterprises, technicians, and vendors to participate in appliance supply chains and maintenance networks.
• Address barriers such as mobility constraints or unpaid care responsibilities by offering childcare services and flexible scheduling for workshops and trainings.

Economic and social benefits

Gender responsive e-cooking programs can catalyze new livelihood opportunities in appliance sales, repair services, and financing. Empowering women entrepreneurs and technicians helps normalize e-cooking use in communities, increases trust among consumers, and creates role models for broader participation in the energy sector.

Integrating gender equity also enhances program effectiveness: evidence shows that interventions designed with women’s input achieve higher adoption and sustained use rates, leading to deeper health, climate, and economic benefits (Tornel et al., 2024; Flechtner et al., 2024). 

Disproportionate exposure and impacts

Low-income households, informal settlements, and marginalized rural or peri-urban communities are disproportionately reliant on polluting biomass and kerosene. Migrant, displaced, and refugee populations—who often live in temporary or informal housing with limited access to clean energy—also face heightened reliance on polluting fuels and elevated exposure to HAP. These groups face higher exposure to PM2.5 and often live in areas with limited health services or weak infrastructure, compounding vulnerability to air pollution-related illnesses.

Households in the informal sector—including street vendors, small food businesses, and artisanal producers—depend on biomass and charcoal for cooking and small-scale manufacturing. Because these activities typically occur in dense urban environments, they add to local air pollution “hot spots” and elevate risks among already overburdened populations.

For indigenous communities and remote populations, reliance on biomass can intersect with cultural practices, territorial constraints, and exclusion from public investment, deepening inequities in both health and opportunity.

Targeted action

Policymakers can use several practical approaches to address these inequities:

• Community engagement and co-development: Ensure affected communities are engaged throughout the program cycle—from baseline data collection (including qualitative methods to capture lived experience) to co-designing interventions and local implementation plans. Use participatory approaches wherever possible, and collaborate with academic partners who can help strengthen community-based research and evaluation.
• Affordability and finance: Introduce tiered subsidies, on-bill financing, micro-loans, or revolving credit schemes for low-income households. Collaborate with microfinance institutions, cooperatives, and savings groups to make appliances accessible through flexible payment terms.
• Infrastructure inclusion: Prioritize electrification of low-income and informal areas through mini-grids, solar battery hybrid systems, or densification of existing networks. Include e-cooking appliances in electricity access packages distributed under national electrification programs.
• Support for informal-sector users: Provide targeted training, grants, or energy efficiency incentives for small vendors, food service providers, and artisan industries to transition from charcoal and kerosene to electricity.
• Cultural adaptation: Engage communities in co-designing programs and testing appliances with culturally appropriate recipes to ensure acceptability. Support initiatives that integrate traditional foods and cooking practices within modern electric methods.
• Indigenous and remote inclusion: Coordinate with ministries of rural development and indigenous affairs to tailor programs that respect cultural norms and local governance structures, including off-grid or mini-grid e-cooking solutions.

Institutional and monitoring measures

Ensure that national M&E frameworks include equity indicators—for example, the proportion of low-income or informal-sector households adopting e-cooking, or the share of subsidies reaching marginalized regions. Establish grievance-redress and feedback mechanisms so that underserved groups can report issues related to pricing, service quality, or discrimination.

Embedding these considerations into air quality, electrification, and social protection policies guarantees that e-cooking interventions reinforce—not widen—existing equity gaps.