Rwanda Efficient Cookstoves Gold Standard Report

GOLD STANDARD LOCAL STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION REPORT
CONTENTS
A. Project Description 1. Project eligibility under Gold Standard 2. Current project status B. Design of Stakeholder Consultation Process 1. Description of physical meeting(s) i. Agenda ii. Non-technical summary iii. Invitation tracking table iv. Text of individual invitations v. Text of public invitations 2. Description of other consultation methods used C. Consultation Process 1. Participants in physical meeting(s) i. List ii. Evaluation forms 2. Pictures from physical meeting(s) 3. Outcome of consultation process i. Minutes of physical meeting(s) ii. Minutes of other consultations iii. Assessment of all comments iv. Revisit sustainable development assessment v. Summary of changes to project design based on comments D. Sustainable Development Assessment 1. Own sustainable development assessment i. Do no harm assessment ii. Sustainable development matrix 2. Stakeholders blind sustainable development matrix 3. Consolidated sustainable development matrix E. Discussion on Sustainability Monitoring Plan F. Description of Stakeholder Feedback Round Annex 1. Annex 2. Original participants list Original feedback forms
Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report
SECTION A.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. 1. Project eligibility under the Gold Standard The project is eligible because it is included in the End-use Energy Efficiency Improvement category, defined as the reduction in the amount of energy required for delivering or producing non-energy physical goods or services. A. 2. Current project status The project is in initial stages. The project framework has been established but no stoves will be purchased from the manufacturer until the start of the validation of the project.
Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009
SECTION B. DESIGN OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS

B. 1. Design of physical meeting(s)
i. Agenda - Opening of the meeting Introductions of Participants and Presenters Review of the Agenda and Purpose of the Meeting - Explanation of the project Background of atmosfair gGmbH and Enedom Explanation about the Gold Standard and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Presentation about the project Demonstration of the Save80 cookstove - Questions for clarification about the project Q&A session on project - Blind SD exercise - Discussion on monitoring SD - Closure of the meeting Complete Participant Evaluation Form - Lunch served
ii. Non-technical summary
The planned Clean Development Mechanism Gold Standard programme will supply households with improved cookstoves, such as the efficient wood fuel stove-cooking-sets called SAVE80, in several districts of Rwanda with an emphasis on the Kigali municipality. The improved cookstoves can be used by households which currently use mainly charcoal as fuel. In the case of the SAVE80 improved cookstove, the set contains a stainless steel stove, several pots with lids and a heat-retaining container. The SAVE80 is a portable stove developed and prefabricated by a German manufacturer and assembled in Rwanda by ENEDOM. It only needs 250 g of small brittle sticks/twigs of wood to bring 6 litres of water to boil, 80% less than traditional open fires. Compared to a charcoal stove, the quantity of wood necessary to cook a meal with the SAVE80 is roughly the same as the quantity of charcoal in a charcoal stove. It is important to consider that it takes 6-9 kg of wood to produce 1 kg of charcoal.
Therefore if the SAVE80 can boil 6 litres of water with 0,25kg of wood, a charcoal stove would need 1,5 to 2,2 kg of wood, demonstrating the massive wood savings from the stove use. The stove is suitable for cooking, frying, water heating and sterilising. After reaching the boiling point, food can be transferred to the heat-retention box, where it will continue to simmer until it is well cooked. This further reduces wood consumption. Besides preventing greenhouse gas emissions, the objectives of the planned CDM Gold Standard programme are: To reduce wood consumption to a sustainable level so as to allow natural recovery of forests and/or reforestation to take place. To reduce soil erosion and protect environment. To reduce indoor air pollution from wood and charcoal smoke and avoid its harmful health consequences. To reduce the fuel bill for charcoal or wood or to reduce the time for wood collection for households. To contribute to the preservation of wood resources so as to avoid inter-communal conflict over resources. To financially empower participating women groups in villages by including them in project activities. To reduce vulnerability of households falling into poverty through increasing fuel wood security. The high quality improved cookstoves are sold at a reduced price to make them affordable to the average households. The financing gap is bridged by CDM revenues. Sales revenues will be directly used to set up sales, marketing and monitoring structures.
iii. Invitation tracking table
Catego ry Code A A A A A
Organisation (if relevant) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Name of Invitee General public Justine MUKATAWUNI Emilienne MUKAKAMANA Aza NIYIGENA Josiane MUKAYUHI
Way of Invitation Newspaper Ad personal personal personal personal
Date of Invitation 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011
Confirma tion received (Y/N)
No Yes Yes Yes No
A A A A A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Secretary of State for Energy Ministry of Infrastructure and Energy (MININFRA) Ministry of Infrastructure and Energy (MININFRA) Ministry of Infrastructure and Energy (MININFRA) Ministry of Forestry and Mines (MINIFOM) Ministry of Forestry and Mines (MINIFOM) Ministry of Environment and Lands (MINELA) Ministry of Local Government (MINELOC) Ministry of Trade and Industry (MINICOM) National Forestry Authority
Mathilde UMUSINDARWEJO Yvonne MUZAYIRE Donatille MUKAMANA Pascal BARANSARITSE Saverina MUSANABERA
personal personal personal personal personal
2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011
No Yes Yes Yes Yes
Colette RUHAMYA
Water Energy
2/7/2011 Yes
Vincent KAREGA
Email
2/7/2011 No
Gaspard NKURIKIYUMUKIZA
Email
2/7/2011 No
Alexis KARANI
Email
2/7/2011 Yes
Christophe BAZIVAMO
Email
2/7/2011 No
Fidle UWIZEYE
Email
2/7/2011 Yes
Stanislas KAMANZI
Email
2/7/2011 No
James MUSONI
Email
2/7/2011 No
Monique NSANZABAGANWA
Email
2/7/2011 No
Frank RUTABINGWA
Email
2/7/2011 No
B B B B B B C
(NAFA) Private Sector Federation Private Sector Federation DG REMA DG RURA RURA RBS DNA REMAUNDP/DNARwanda Dutch embassy energy expert EU Energy expert US Embassy USAID Rural develoment specialist US Embassy DFID energy specialist GIZ UN Women representativ e DUTERIMBER E COPEDU Profemme Inyenyeri Practical Action Care Rwanda IFDC SNV BTC
Steven NIYONZIMA BAYIGAMBA Robert Rose MUKANKOMEJE Regis GATARAYIHA Jean Baptiste BWANAKEYE MURENZI Raymond generic
Email Email Email Email Email Email Email
2/4/2011 No 2/7/2011 No 2/7/2011 No 2/7/2011 No 2/7/2011 Yes 2/7/2011 Yes 2/4/2011 No
Jean NTAZINDA
Email
2/4/2011 Yes
D D D
Fred Smiet Machiels Olivier William RUTAREMARA
Email Email Email
2/4/2011 No 2/7/2011 Yes 2/7/2011 Yes
D D D D
Aimee Mpamabara William RUTAREMARA Sion Mc Geever Elisabeth Girrbach
Email Email Email Email
2/4/2011 No 2/7/2011 Yes 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No
D D D D D D D D D D
Donnah Kamashazi Francoise SAKINDI Denise MUREBWAYIRE Therese BISHAGARA Ereynolds Boulder Hiwote Teshome Prudence Ndolimana Fabien Kayitare Erik van Waveren Erik van Malderen
Email Email Email Email Email Email Email Email Email Email
2/4/2011 No 2/7/2011 2/7/2011 2/7/2011 2/4/2011 2/4/2011 2/4/2011 2/4/2011 2/4/2011 2/4/2011 No No No No No Yes No No No
D D E E E
F F F F F F F
ARED TRAC Gold Standard Gold Standard Gold Standard Zero: Regional Environment Organisation (Zimbabwe) South South North (SA) WWF REEEP (Namibia) Greenpeace International Mercy Corps Helio International Climate Action Network South Africa European Business Council For Sustainable Energy e5 Germanwatch
Jean Bosco Rwiyamirira Bonaventure KAMUGISHA Nahla Sabet Heba Rabie Aarti Agrawal
Email Email E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail
2/7/2011 2/7/2011 2/4/2011 2/4/2011 2/4/2011
Yes Yes No No No
Johannes Chigwada Stefan Raubenheimer Bella Roscher Marianne Osterkorn Representatives - not personalized Dorothee McIntosh Helene Connor
E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail
2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No
Dorah Lebelo
E-Mail
2/4/2011 No
F F
Julio Lambing Christoph Bals
E-Mail E-Mail
2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No
iv. Text of individual invitations
Text of public invitations The below advertisement was posted in The New Times newspaper on 10 February 2011.
10
B. 2.
Description of other consultation methods used
If individuals and/ or entities (e.g. NGOs) are unable to attend the physical meeting, please discuss other methods that were used to solicit their feedback/ comments (e.g. questionnaires, phone calls, interviews). This report will be uploaded to the Gold Standard registry and will be publicly
11
available. Attendees who left their email address will be emailed the report. Attendees without email addresses will be provided hard copies of the report upon request. Contact details of Jean Marie were provided so that any other stakeholders interested may request the report. A summary of the Local Stakeholder Consultation and of the project will be made available on the atmosfair gGmbH website.
12
SECTION C.
CONSULTATION PROCESS
C. 1. Participants in physical meeting(s) Original participants list (in original language) is attached as Annex 1. i. List of participants1
Category code Name A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A B B B C C C Alphonsine Mukashyaka Florence Mukantaganzwa Emilienne Mukakamana Justine Mukatawuni Jean Baptist Mbarushimana Francine Umutesi Eliezer Niyitegeko Christian Abizurer Xaverine Musanabera Edouard Mnonkuru Cecile Mbabazi Alex Niyigana Josiane Mukayuhi Mathilde Umusindarwejo Jean Marie Kayonga Courtney Blodgett Papias Karanganwa Julia Harter Theoneste Habimana Janvier Kabahaniye Yves Tuyishime Immaculee Uwimana Job/Position Local expert in institutional biogas Local resident Local resident Local resident Cell President Local resident Student Umudugudu Chief Local resident Local resident Business woman Local resident Local resident Director Consultant Carbon expert Intern Police DNA CDM intern DNA CDM intern Mitigation Officer CDM DNA Capacity Building Project Manager RE Advisor RE Advisor Project manager Programme Officer Operations Officer Training and M&E Professional Organisation MININFRA Male/Female (M/F) F F F F M F M M F M F F F F M F M F M M M F
Local government Local government
Kicukiro District
Enedom MININFOM GIZ/MININFRA MINITER REMA REMA REMA
C D D D D D D
Jean Ntazinda Joerg Schaeffer Anaclet Ndahimana Twizere Turambe Olivier Machiels Etienne Ndatimana Augustin Niyonsaba
REMA SNV SNV COPED European Union IFC Care International
M M M M M M F
Contact details have not been provided for privacy purposes.
13
Cate gory code A
Category Local people impacted by the project or official representatives Local policy makers and representatives of local authorities
B An official representative of the DNA of the host country of your project C Local non-governmental organisations working on topics relevant to your project D The local Gold Standard expert who is located closest to your project location. E Relevant international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) supporting the Gold Standard, with a representation in your region and ALL GS supporter NGOs located in the host country of the project. F
ii. Evaluation forms Original evaluation forms (in original language) are attached as Annex 2. Summary of feedback provided on evaluation forms below Name What is your impression of the o Successful meeting? o Stakeholders shared their views o Sustainable development matrix took too long o Too few people at the meeting What do you like about the o Saves firewood project? o Very efficient technology o Will save money o Great opportunity o Useful new technology o Will help alleviate poverty What do you not like about the o Too expensive for rural people project? o 2 saucepans are not enough o Access to firewood will be problematic What would you suggest to o Reduce the cost of the stove improve about the project?
14
Sample evaluation form 1: Name What is your impression of the meeting? What do you like about the project? What do you not like about the project? Sample evaluation form 2: Name What is your impression of the meeting? What do you like about the project? What do you not like about the project? Sample evaluation form 3: Name What is your impression of the meeting? What do you like about the project? What do you not like about the project? Sample evaluation form 4: Name What is your impression of the meeting? What do you like about the project? What do you not like about the project?
o Successful o Stakeholders shared their views o Saves firewood o Too expensive for rural people o 2 saucepans are not enough
o Well organized o The project is environmentally friendly o Poverty alleviation
o Well organized but few people o The cookstove is very interesting o Cost of the cookstove for people in rural areas
o Good presentation o The project is economical (saves time and money) --
15
Comments accompanying Annex 2 18 evaluation forms were received. All of the forms received were in English. The comments are summarized above and the scanned copies of all evaluation forms are in Annex 2. C. 2. Pictures from physical meeting(s)
Participants watching a demonstration of the improved cookstove.
Stakeholder consultation participants
C. 3. Outcome of consultation process Please ensure that you include a summary of the meeting as well as all comments received. i. Minutes of physical meeting(s)
16
The meeting began with an introduction by Mr. Xaver Kitzinger, of atmosfair gGmbH. Xaver thanked participants for coming and introduced his colleagues, Mr. Jean Marie Kayonga, Director of Enedom, and Ms. Courtney Blodgett, consultant. The rest of participants then introduced his or herself and stated his/her affiliation. Following the introduction, Xaver gave the audience the opening presentation. Xaver introduced atmosfair gGmbH and Enedom. Following this, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), Programme of Activities (PoA) and Gold Standard were explained to the audience. Xaver then explained why an improved cookstove project was necessary in Rwanda and how an improved cookstove PoA would benefit Rwanda. Xaver explained about the Save80 cookstove and the items (2 pots and a Wonderbox) that would come with it and the cost and wood savings that would arise from its use. Xaver showed the volume of wood (9kg) necessary to make 1 kg of charcoal. He also showed the volume of wood (2.5 kg) necessary for a household to cook for a day using the Save80. Xaver presented in English but his presentation was summarized in Kinyarwanda. After the introduction paragraph, the participants went outside for the demonstration of the improved cookstove. The stove was started and water was boiled. Rice was then put into the water, boiled for a short time and then placed in the Wonderbox. The rice was later eaten during lunch. Participants then proceeded to ask questions in English and Kinyarwanda. Xaver and Jean Marie answered all of the questions, in the appropriate language. Questions are summarized in Section C.3.iii. Jean Marie then proceeded to provide a Kinyarwanda summary of the project and the questions for participants. Following the demonstration and a tea break, Courtney introduced the Do no harm principles and the blind sustainable development exercise. Participants then proceeded to discuss the Environmental, Social Development and Economic & Technical Development parameters as well as monitoring parameters. Results from the discussion are presented in Section D.2. Questions and discussions were translated between English and Kinyarwanda. ii. Minutes of other consultations N/A iii. Assessment of all comments Questions and comments below were asked during the stakeholder consultation. Stakeholder comment Was Explanation (Why? How?)
17
comment taken into account (Yes/ No)? Is the name of the Save80 Yes based on cost savings or wood savings? How will the marketed? Save80s be Yes
Wood savings
Enedom will hold demonstrations of the stove at markets, in workshops and at umuganda (monthly community service). The Save80 will also be available for purchase at the Enedom office in Kigali As there are Save80 projects in other countries, there are ongoing discussions to produce them locally. However, at the moment, due to the high cost of material (particularly stainless steel), it is not technically feasible and also wouldnt be cost effective to produce the stoves locally. The wood availability needs to be organized. Jean Marie has begun drying wood in his workshop and he plans to sell it at charcoal kiosks and markets. If the demand is great enough, others will also begin to sell wood.
The products are coming from Germany. Can they be made locally?
No
How will people get wood as most people in Kigali are used to using charcoal, which is readily available?
Yes
18
You mentioned the wood and cost savings from the cookstove but what are the energy savings?
Yes
For the user, fuel and cost savings are most relevant. However, 80% of energy is saved, in comparison with a 3 stone fire. Any saucepan that rests on top of the Save80 may be used. Briquettes can may used, although their use hasnt yet been tested properly but not charcoal.
Can other saucepans be used on the Save80?
Yes
Can charcoal or briquettes be used in the Save80?
Yes
iv. Revisit sustainability assessment Are you going to revisit the sustainable development assessment? Please note that this is necessary when there are indicators scored negative or if there are stakeholder comments that cant be mitigated [See Toolkit 2.7] Give reasoning behind the decision Stakeholders did not think that any of the indicators should receive a negative score. The only negative parameter mentioned was that if there was too much competition from others selling improved cookstoves, competition could harm the project success. However, as this is not directly related to the sustainable development indicators but to the overall success of the project, it will not require revisitation. v. Summary of alterations based on comments Yes No
19
If stakeholder comments have been taken into account and any aspect of the project modified, then please discuss that here. Stakeholder comments that will be taken into account include: What will happen to the stoves after their lifetime? o A review will be completed to see if it is possible to recycle the Save80 stoves. However, due to the high demand for and high cost of metal in Rwanda, it is assumed that the metal will happily be taken by metal scrappers. Can Save80 stoves be made locally? o atmosfair gGmbH will continue to discuss with the Save80 manufacturer the possibility of local production of the stoves.
20
SECTION D. ASSESSMENT
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
D. 1. Own sustainable development assessment i. Do no harm assessment Safeguarding principles Description of relevance to my project Assessment Mitigation of my measure project risks breaching it (low, medium, high) low N/A
1 Human rights
2 Involuntary settlements
3 Cultural heritage
Rwanda has ratified the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the African Charter on Humans and People's Rights. The project will protect human rights including freedoms and cultural property. The project will not cause any involuntary settlements. Rwanda has passed Law N 18/2007 OF 19/04/2007 Relating to expropriation in the public interest is strictly adhered to in Rwanda. Rwanda ratified the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. The project does not involve and is not complicit in the alteration, damage or removal of any critical cultural heritage.
low
N/A
low
N/A
21
4 Labor collective bargaining and freedom of association
5 Forced labor
Rwanda has ratified both ILO convention 872 (freedom of association) and 983 (right to collective bargaining). Furthermore, Rwanda has passed Law N 51/2001 OF 30/12/2001 Establishing the labor code and Law N13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda4. Rwanda has ratified both ILO Convention 295 and 1056 on elimination of forced and compulsory labour. Furthermore, local legislation prohibits forced labor. Rwanda has passed Law N 51/2001 OF 30/12/2001 Establishing the labor code7 and Law N13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda4. The project does not involve and is not complicit in any form of forced or compulsory labour. All
low
N/A
low
N/A
2 3 4
http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/ratifce.pl?C087 http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/ratifce.pl?C098
http://amategeko.net/display_rubrique.php?ActDo=ShowArt&Information_ID=2465&Parent_ID=3070170 9&type=public&Langue_ID=An&rubID=30701797
5 6 7
http://www.amategeko.net/display_rubrique.php?Information_ID=1217&Parent_ID=30692620&type=publi c&Langue_ID=An
22
labor is voluntary.
6 Child labor
7 Labor discrimination
Rwanda has ratified Low both ILO convention 1388 (minimum age) and 1829 (worst form of child labor). Furthermore, Law N 51/2001 OF 30/12/2001 Establishing the labor code7; Law N13/2009 of 27/05/2009 regulating labour in Rwanda prohibit child labor10. Child labor will not be employed. Rwanda has ratified low 11 convention 100 (equal remuneration) and convention 11112 (Discrimination in employment/ occupation) under the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. The Law N 51/2001 OF 30/12/2001 Establishing the labor code7 also prohibits discrimination. Labor discrimination will not occur.
N/A
N/A
8 9
10
http://www.mifotra.gov.rw/documents/Laws/NEW%20LABOUR%20LAW%20N13.2009%20OF%2027.5 .2009.pdf
11 12
23
8 Labor safety
9- Environmental harm
The Law N 51/2001 OF 30/12/2001 Establishing the labor code7 and the Rwanda National Construction Industry Policy13 legislate and guide on health and safety practices in the work place. Labor conditions in this project are safe. Rwanda ratified the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development14. In addition, Rwanda has passed a number of other relevant laws including: N 04/2005 of 08/04/2005 Organic Law determining the modalities of protection, conservation and promotion of environment in Rwanda15; Ministerial Order N 004/2008 on Establishing the list of works, activities and projects that have to undertake an environmental impact assessment16; 1988 Forestry Law.
low
N/A
low
N/A
13 14 15
http://mininfra.gov.rw/index2.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=113&Itemid=263 http://www.un.org/esa/documents/ecosoc/cn17/1997/ecn171997-8.htm
http://www.amategeko.net/display_rubrique.php?Information_ID=665&Parent_ID=3068016&type=public& Langue_ID=An
16
http://www.primature.gov.rw/index2.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=779&Itemid=95
24
10 Degradation of habitats
The project is positive for the environment, since it decreases unsustainable harvesting of wood from forests. In addition, the stainless steel from the stoves at the end of their lifetime will be highly valued due to the high price of metal in Rwanda. Rwanda ratified the Rio low Declaration on Environment and Development. In addition, Rwanda has passed a number of other relevant laws including: N 04/2005 of 08/04/2005 Organic Law determining the modalities of protection, conservation and promotion of environment in Rwanda15; Ministerial Order N 004/2008 on Establishing the list of works, activities and projects that have to undertake an environmental impact assessment16; 1988 Forestry Law. The project is positive for the environment, since it decreases unsustainable harvesting of wood from forests. In addition, the stainless steel from the stoves at the end of their lifetime will be highly
N/A
25
11- Corruption
valued due to the high price of metal in Rwanda. The project will prevent the degradation of habitats due to decreased deforestation. Rwanda ratified the low United Nations Convention Against Corruption17. Furthermore, Rwanda passed the Law N 23/2003 of 07/08/2003 Related to punishment of corruption and related offences18 and this law is strictly enforced.
N/A
ii. Sustainable development matrix [See Toolkit 2.4.2 and Toolkit Annex I]
Mitigati on measur e
Indicator
Relevance to achieving MDG
Chosen parameter and explanation Parameter: Emissions from fuel consumption. Air quality will be improved by the reduction of fuel burned; however, it is difficult to compare the emissions from an efficient wood burning stove with that of a charcoal stove. Impacts are not seen as being significant enough to monitor.
Preliminary score
Air quality
N/A
MDG 7: Ensure environmental sustainability
17 18
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/signatories.html
http://www.amategeko.net/display_rubrique.php?Information_ID=1170&Parent_ID=30692132&type=publi c&Langue_ID=An
26
Water quality and quantity
N/A
Parameter: Sedimentation of lakes and rivers. Reduced deforestation will lead to decrease soil erosion and decreased sedimentation of lakes and rivers. However, deforestation for fuel wood will still occur so the impact will be neutral.
Soil condition
N/A
Other pollutants
N/A
MDG 7: Ensure environmental sustainability MDG 7: Ensure environmental sustainability
Parameter: Decreased fuel wood as a proxy for decrease amount of soil erosion from deforestation. Reduced deforestation will lead to decrease soil erosion. However, deforestation for fuel will still occur so soil condition will not be drastically altered.
Other pollutants such as noise will not be impacted Parameter: Decreased fuel wood as a proxy for decreased biodiversity from deforestation. Reduced deforestation will lead to decreased habitat destruction. However, deforestation for fuel wood use will still occur so biodiversity will not be drastically altered.
Biodiversity
N/A
Quality of employmen t
N/A
MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Parameter: technical level of employment. Assembly and sale will provide high quality employment. However, as the number of people working in the charcoal value chain may decrease, effects are neutralized.
27
Livelihood of poor
N/A
Parameter: Money saved from reduced consumption of fuel. Improved cookstove use will reduce money spent on charcoal
Access to affordable and clean energy services
N/A
Parameter: Number of households with cookstoves. Improved cookstoves will provide cleaner energy to households. However, the number of households with cookstove access will not increase. Parameter: Amount of time spent in acquiring fuel and cooking on improved cookstove. Improved cookstove and wonderbox use will promote gender equality as less time will be spent in acquiring fuel and in cooking
Human and institutional capacity
N/A
Quantitativ e employmen t and income generation Balance of payments and investment
N/A
N/A
MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Parameter: Number of jobs created. Assembly and sale will provide employment. However, jobs may be loss from charcoal production. They will most likely be replaced by jobs processing wood but the impact will most likely be neutral
N/A
28
Technology transfer and technologic al self reliance
N/A
MDG 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development
Parameter: Introduction of new cookstove technology. New technology introduced to Rwanda and Rwandans will be trained to assembly and use the stoves
Comments accompanying own sustainable development matrix The project has only neutral and positive indicators therefore it is expected to contribute to sustainable development in Rwanda.
D. 2. Stakeholders Blind Sustainable Development Matrix
Indicator
Mitigation Relevance to measure achieving MDG Chosen parameter
Prelimin ary score
Air quality
N/A
Water quality and quantity
N/A
Parameter: Air quality will be improved by the reduction of fuel burned; however, it is difficult to compare the emissions from an efficient wood burning stove with that of a charcoal stove. Parameter: Sedimentation of lakes and rivers. 1. Due to being able to use less fuel for cooking, it may now be possible to use fuel to boil water for drinking. 2. No direct connection besides cutting less trees which helps water systems. 3. Less charcoal dust to pollute rivers. Parameter: Decreased fuel wood as a proxy for decrease amount of soil erosion from deforestation. Less soil erosion due to less trees cut
Soil condition
N/A
29
Other pollutants
N/A
Decomposition of stove after lifetime
Biodiversity
N/A
Parameter: Decreased fuel wood as a proxy for decreased biodiversity from deforestation. 1. If forests are not cut/protected, this will increase biodiversity 2. Shortage of firewood results in cutting of other plants for fuel so reduced firewood demand will preserve other plants
Quality of employment
N/A
Livelihood of poor Access to affordable and clean energy services
N/A
N/A
N/A
MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Parameter: technical level of employment. Assembly jobs are a good job opportunity; time savings from Save80 use will enable users and household employees to have more time for other tasks Parameter: Money saved from reduced consumption of fuel. Money savings from reduced purchase of fuel
Parameter: Number of households with cookstoves. Product is affordable and clean
Parameter: Amount of time spent in acquiring fuel and cooking on improved cookstove. not applicable
30
Quantitative employment and income generation Balance of payments and investment Technology transfer and technological self - reliance
N/A
N/A
N/A
MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger MDG 8: Develop a Global Partnership for Development
Parameter: Number of jobs created. External people employed for sales
not applicable
Parameter: Introduction of new cookstove technology. New technology introduced
Additional comments: What happens if there is competition from other people also selling efficient stoves, what has to be done to sell the Save80 stove successfully? Is there another very similar project that people attending know about? Yes, there are other activities which also sell stoves but none like the Save80. Competition could be a (-) parameter; however, it is directly related to the project success, not the SD indicators. Mitigation measure could be to have an effective marketing campaign. Monitoring parameter: Number of Save80 stoves sold under the project
Comments resulting from the stakeholders blind sustainable development matrix The stakeholders blind assessment was very positive. The one worry of the stakeholders that due to competition and high cost, not many stoves will be sold. Give analysis of difference between own sustainable development matrix and the one resulting from the blind exercise with stakeholders. Explain how both were consolidated. Both the self and stakeholder sustainable development matrix for positively viewed. However, the self matrix was more considerate of negative impacts of the project, such as potential loss of jobs in the charcoal value chain. This results in a neutralizing score for all but a few indicators (livelihood of the poor, human and institutional capacity, and technological transfer & technological self reliance). No indicators were found to be negative.
D. 3. Consolidated sustainable development matrix
31
Indicator
Mitigation Relevance to measure achieving MDG
Chosen parameter and explanation Parameter: Emissions from fuel consumption. Air quality will be improved by the reduction of fuel burned; however, it is difficult to compare the emissions from an efficient wood burning stove with that of a charcoal stove. Impacts are not seen as being significant enough to monitor
Preliminary score
Air quality
N/A
Water quality and quantity N/A
Parameter: Sedimentation of lakes and rivers. Reduced deforestation will lead to decrease soil erosion and decreased sedimentation of lakes and rivers. However, deforestation for fuel wood will still occur so the impact will be neutral and monitoring of this parameter is not seen as being necessary.
Soil condition N/A
Parameter: Decreased fuel wood as a proxy for decrease amount of soil erosion from deforestation. Reduced deforestation will lead to decrease soil erosion. However, deforestation for fuel will still occur so soil condition will not be drastically altered and monitoring is not necessary.
32
Other pollutants
N/A
Other pollutants such as noise will not be impacted. At the end of the stoves lifetime, the metal may be considered waste. However, it is expected that, due to the stove being made from a high quality metal, the stove will be recycled and monitoring is not necessary.
Biodiversity
N/A
Parameter: Decreased fuel wood as a proxy for decreased biodiversity from deforestation. Reduced deforestation will lead to decreased habitat destruction. However, deforestation for fuel wood use will still occur so biodiversity will not be drastically altered and monitoring is not necessary.
N/A
Parameter: technical level of employment. Assembly and sale will provide high quality employment; Rwandans will be trained in order to assemble the stoves and to work on the sales activities. However, as the number of people working in the MDG 1: Eradicate charcoal value chain may decrease, extreme poverty effects are neutralized and monitoring is not necessary. and hunger Parameter: Money saved from reduced consumption of fuel. Improved cookstove use will reduce MDG 1: Eradicate money spent on charcoal. The amount extreme poverty of money saved on fuel by users will and hunger be monitored.
Livelihood of poor
N/A
33
Access to affordable and clean energy services N/A
Parameter: Number of households with cookstoves. Improved cookstoves will provide cleaner energy MDG 1: Eradicate to households. However, the number extreme poverty of households with cookstove access and hunger will not increase.
N/A
Parameter: Amount of time spent in acquiring fuel and cooking on improved cookstove. Improved cookstove and heat retention device use will promote gender equality as less time will be spent in acquiring fuel MDG 1: Eradicate and in cooking. The amount of time extreme poverty spent cooking and collecting fuel will and hunger be monitored.
Quantitative employment and income generation
N/A
Parameter: Number of jobs created. Assembly and sale will provide employment. However, jobs may be loss from charcoal production. They will most likely be replaced by jobs MDG 1: Eradicate processing wood but the impact will extreme poverty most likely be neutral and this parameter will not be monitored. and hunger MDG 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger N/A
Balance of payments and investment N/A
34
Technology transfer and technological self - reliance N/A
Parameter: Introduction of new cookstove technology. New technology introduced to Rwanda. Rwandans will be trained to use the stoves when purchasing the stoves. Options to train the buyers at the time of purchase include: showing a film demonstrating how to use the stove, providing an onsite demonstration and providing documents detailing MDG 8: how to use the stoves. The number of Develop a new cookstove types introduced to Global Partnership for Rwanda as part of the project activity Development will be monitored.
35
Justification choices, data source and provision of references A justification paragraph and reference source is required for each indicator, regardless of score
Air quality
Water quality and quantity Soil condition
Air quality will be improved through the decreased emissions from the decreased amount of fuel combusted. Air pollution from cookstoves is a significant source of respiratory and other illnesses. 8,100 deaths per year in Rwanda are attributed to solid fuel use. Exposure to indoor air pollution (commonly measured by the pollutants carbon monoxide and fine particles) is responsible for the annual loss of 262,300 disabilityadjusted life years (DALYs) per year19. The DALY is a standard metric used by the World Health Organization (WHO) to indicate the burden of death and illness due to a specific risk factor. The project will reduce erosion caused by deforestation. Most of the soil lost through erosion in Rwanda ends up in the stream network and marshlands20. Reduced deforestation and use of crop residues for cooking will improve soil condition. Domestic and industrial energy demands have indirectly contributed to soil erosion in Rwanda. Much of the countrys energy requirements are met by crop residues as well as fuel wood. The use of crop residues limits the extent to which they can be used to conserve soil moisture and fertility. Deforestation on the other hand leads to extensive soil erosion and in some instances oods and landslides21. However, many other external factors such as continued deforestation for fuel use from users of non-improved cookstoves, increased agriculture usage as population increases, increased flood or drought events from climate change - will still affect the soil condition.
19
World Health Organization; Indoor Air Pollution: National Burden of Disease Estimates: http://www.who.int/indoorair/publications/indoor_air_national_burden_estimate_revised.pdf
20
Musahara, H. Improving Tenure Security For The Rural Poor Rwanda Country Case Study. Legal Empowerment of the Poor (LEP). Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the United Nations.2006.
21
Rwanda Environment Management Authority. Rwanda State of the Environment and Outlook. United Nations Environment Programme. 2009.
36
Other pollutants
Biodiversity
Livelihood of the poor
Access to affordable and clean energy services
The project activity does not produce any other pollutants. At the end of the stoves lifetime, the metal may be considered waste. However, it is expected that, due to the stove being made from a high quality metal, the stove will be recycled. Currently, 85% of the energy used in Rwanda is in the form of biomass (mainly for cooking, households and institutions)22. Reduction in deforestation will reduce threats to flora and fauna and their habitats. However, deforestation for fuel wood use will still occur so biodiversity will not be drastically altered. High quality jobs will be created for assembly and sales of the cookstoves; Rwandans will be trained in order to assemble the stoves and to work on the sales activities. In 2000, only 200,000 non-agricultural jobs were existed. However, the Government of Rwanda (GoR) goal is that by 2020, 1.4 million non-agricultural jobs will exist23. However, this level of non-agricultural jobs will be affected by many factors such as government policies, level of education and growth of the private sector. Decreased purchasing of charcoal and decreased cooking time (where applicable) will result in cost and time savings, enabling time and money to be spent on other necessities and activities. The GDP per capita in 2010 was $54024. The goal of Vision 2020 is that the GDP will be $900 by 202023. Improved cookstoves will provide cleaner energy services with significant cost savings in fuel. However, the project participants most likely already use cookstoves25 so the project will not increase access to energy services. The participants will just use more efficient cookstoves. Gender equality will be improved through a reduction in time used to acquire fuel and, if applicable, time saved in cooking, as acquiring fuel and cooking are both traditionally done by women. This is particularly
22 23 24 25
Biomass Energy Strategy. Ministry of Infrastructure/MARGE. June 2009. Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning. Rwanda Vision 2020. 2000. National Institute of Statistics. 2011. http://www.statistics.gov.rw/
75% of households cook on charcoal [which translates that most, if not all, of those people are using cookstoves]. Winrock International for US AID. Implementation for increasing the adoption and use of efficient charcoal cookstoves in urban and peri-urban Kigali. May 2007.
37
Quantitative employment and income generation
Balance of payments and investment
Technology transfer and technological self-reliance
important as women are more vulnerable to climate change because they often have the responsibility of securing water, food and fuel for cooking and heating26 Jobs will be created through the assembly and sale of the stoves. However, as there are 300,000 jobs created through the charcoal value chain27 and some of those jobs may be lost due to a reduction in the consumption of charcoal, the number of jobs created will most likely be neutralized by the number of job lost in charcoal production. This was found by stakeholders to be not applicable to the project activity. However, atmosfair gGmbH and Enedom will both invest time and money in the set up and organisation of the project. The introduction of improved cookstoves will bring a new technology to Rwanda. Rwandans will be trained to use the stoves when purchasing the stoves. Options to train the buyers at the time of purchase include: showing a film demonstrating how to use the stove, providing an onsite demonstration and providing documents detailing how to use the stoves.
SECTION E.
DISCUSSION ON SUSTAINABILITY MONITORING PLAN
Discuss stakeholders ideas on monitoring sustainable development indicators. Do people have ideas on how this could be done in a cost effective way? Are there ways in which stakeholders can participate in monitoring? During the blind sustainable development matrix exercise, stakeholders discussed monitoring parameters for the positive indicators (there were no negative indicators found). The monitoring parameters relevant to each indicator are detailed in Section D.3. Most of the parameters have a neutral impact and will therefore not be monitored. Parameters which will be monitored included: Livelihood of the poor: The cost of fuel savings from using the improved cookstove Human and institutional capacity: Amount of time spent in acquiring fuel and cooking on improved cookstove
26 27
UN Women Watch. Women, Gender Equality and Climate Change Factsheet. 2009.
Falzon, JP. IS-Academy RENEW. Creating an enabling business environment for sustainable charcoal chain in Rwanda. 2010.
38
Technology transfer and technological self reliance: Introduction of new cookstove technology
SECTION F.
DESCRIPTION OF THE DESIGN OF THE STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK ROUND
The stakeholder feedback round will be designed and conducted after the completion of the design documents.
39
ANNEX 1.
ORIGINAL PARTICIPANTS LIST28
28
Participant contact details have been removed for privacys sake. The original scan can be provided to the GS or DOE upon request.
41
42
43
ANNEX 2.
ORIGINAL EVALUATION FORMS
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51

Rwanda Efficient Cookstoves Gold Standard Report

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Rwanda Efficient Cookstoves Gold Standard Report

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

GOLD STANDARD LOCAL STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION REPORT

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

SECTION B. DESIGN OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION PROCESS

ii. Non-technical summary

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

iii. Invitation tracking table

Organisation (if relevant) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Way of Invitation Newspaper Ad personal personal personal personal

Date of Invitation 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011

Confirma tion received (Y/N)

No Yes Yes Yes No

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

personal personal personal personal personal

2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011 2/10/2011

No Yes Yes Yes Yes

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Email Email Email Email Email Email Email

2/4/2011 No 2/7/2011 No 2/7/2011 No 2/7/2011 No 2/7/2011 Yes 2/7/2011 Yes 2/4/2011 No

Fred Smiet Machiels Olivier William RUTAREMARA

Email Email Email

2/4/2011 No 2/7/2011 Yes 2/7/2011 Yes

Aimee Mpamabara William RUTAREMARA Sion Mc Geever Elisabeth Girrbach

Email Email Email Email

2/4/2011 No 2/7/2011 Yes 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Email Email E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail

2/7/2011 2/7/2011 2/4/2011 2/4/2011 2/4/2011

E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail E-Mail

2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No 2/4/2011 No

Julio Lambing Christoph Bals

iv. Text of individual invitations

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Description of other consultation methods used

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Local government Local government

Enedom MININFOM GIZ/MININFRA MINITER REMA REMA REMA

REMA SNV SNV COPED European Union IFC Care International

Contact details have not been provided for privacy purposes.

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Cate gory code A

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

o Well organized o The project is environmentally friendly o Poverty alleviation

o Good presentation o The project is economical (saves time and money) --

Gold Standard Passport version 2.1 July 2009

Gold Standard Local Stakeholder Consultation Report

Participants watching a demonstration of the improved cookstove.