Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Evidence of gender inequality in energy use from a mixed-methods study in India


Prior studies suggest that women particularly stand to benefit from increased electricity access. Yet, few have empirically tested this implicit linkage between energy access (SDG 7) and gender equality (SDG 5). More specifically, few explore how female household members use electricity once it is made accessible. Using India as an illustrative case, we conduct a mixed-methods study. We first inductively assess household appliance use by gender in Gujarat (n = 31). We then assess the generalizability of the use patterns identified through a representative six-state household survey (Bihar, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, n = 8,563). In including use, we find that women are neither the sole nor primary beneficiaries of electricity access, even when appliances that would particularly benefit them are affordable. While energy access could improve gender equity, our study highlights intra-household power dynamics as an important boundary condition on realizing more equitable energy access.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Household matrices of appliance ownership and use.
Fig. 2: Effects of grid electricity on ownership of male- versus female-used appliances.

Data availability

The data for the generalizability study conducted in six Indian states are publicly available at Harvard Dataverse (

Code availability

The code used to generate the results is also made available here: The data for the inductive study in Gujarat (questionnaire data, interview data and ethnographic observations) are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.


  1. 1.

    Nilsson, M., Griggs, D. & Visbeck, M. Policy: map the interactions between sustainable development goals. Nature 534, 320–322 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Bleischwitz, R. et al. Resource nexus perspectives towards the United Nations sustainable development goals. Nat. Sustain. 1, 737–743 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Berthaud, A. et al. Integrating Gender in Energy Provision Case Study of Bangladesh ESMAP paper (World Bank, 2004);

  4. 4.

    Bose, S. Money, Energy and Welfare: The State and the Household in India’s Rural Electrification Policy (Oxford Univ. Press, 1993).

  5. 5.

    Desai, S. & Jain, D. Maternal employment and changes in family dynamics—the social-context of womens work in rural south-india. Popul. Dev. Rev. 20, 115–136 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Köhlin, G., Sills, E. O., Pattanayak, S. K. & Wilfong, C. Energy, Gender and Development: What Are the Linkages? Where Is the Evidence? World Bank Policy Research Working Paper (World Bank, 2011).

  7. 7.

    Ashraf, N., Karlan, D. & Yin, W. Female empowerment: impact of a commitment savings product in the Philippines. World Dev. 38, 333–344 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Daly, H. et al. Energy Access Outlook: From Poverty to Prosperity (ed. Hosker, E.) (OECD, International Energy Agency, 2017).

  9. 9.

    Kaygusuz, K. Energy services and energy poverty for sustainable rural development. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15, 936–947 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Mathur, J. K. & Mathur, D. Dark homes and smoky hearths: rural electrification and women. Econ. Polit. Wkly 40, 638–643 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Prayas Energy Group. Proc. Report of the Round Table on Gender and Electricity (Prayas Energy Group, 2014). .

  12. 12.

    Burke, P. J. & Dundas, G. Female labor force participation and household dependence on biomass energy: evidence from national longitudinal data. World Dev. 67, 424–437 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Mercer-Blackman, V. & Tanaka, S. Women in the Workforce: An Unmet Potential in Asia and the Pacific (ed. Llorin, C. Jr) (Asian Development Bank, 2015).

  14. 14.

    Parikh, J. Hardships and health impacts on women due to traditional cooking fuels: a case study of Himachal Pradesh, India. Energy Policy 39, 7587–7594 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Bhatia, M. & Angelou, N. Beyond Connections: Energy Access Redefined ESMAP Technical Report 008/15 (World Bank, 2015).

  16. 16.

    Duflo, E. & Udry, C. Intrahousehold Resource Allocation in Cote d’Ivoire: Social Norms, Separate Accounts and Consumption Choices Working Paper no. 10498 (NBER, 2004).

  17. 17.

    Haddad, L. J., Hoddinott, J., Alderman, H. & International Food Policy Research Institute. Intrahousehold Resource Allocation in Developing Countries: Models, Methods, and Policy (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1997).

  18. 18.

    Wang, S. Y. Property rights and intra-household bargaining. J. Dev. Econ. 107, 192–201 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Stopnitzky, Y. No toilet no bride? Intrahousehold bargaining in male-skewed marriage markets in India. J. Dev. Econ. 127, 269–282 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Edmondson, A. C. & McManus, S. E. Methodological fit in management field research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32, 1155–1179 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Aklin, M., Cheng, C.-y., Ganesan, K., Jain, A. & Urpelainen, J. Council on Energy, Environment and Water. Access to Clean Cooking Energy and Electricity: Survey of States in India (ACCESS) Harvard Dataverse, V1 (2016);

  22. 22.

    Sovacool, B. K. What are we doing here? Analyzing fifteen years of energy scholarship and proposing a social science research agenda. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 1, 1–29 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Sovacool, B. K. Energy studies need social science. Nature 511, 529–530 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Daly, H et al. Energy Access Outlook 2017: From Poverty to Prosperity (International Energy Agency, 2017).

  25. 25.

    Banerjee, S. G., Barnes, D., Singh, B., Mayer, K. & Samad, H. Power for All: Electricity Access Challenge in India (World Bank, 2015).

  26. 26.

    Williams, N. J., Jaramillo, P., Taneja, J. & Ustun, T. S. Enabling private sector investment in microgrid-based rural electrification in developing countries: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energ. Rev. 52, 1268–1281 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Mishra, P. K. Alleviating Energy Poverty Through Innovation: The Case of Jyotigramyojana (Rural Lighting Scheme) of Gujarat (World Energy Congress, 2010).

  28. 28.

    Power Distribution Reforms in Gujarat Working Paper (IDFC, 2009).

  29. 29.

    Shah, T. & Verma, S. Co-management of electricity and groundwater: an assessment of Gujarat’s Jyotirgram scheme. Econ. Polit. Wkly 43, 59–66 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Dinkelman, T. The effects of rural electrification on employment: new evidence from South Africa. Am. Econ. Rev. 101, 3078–3108 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Khandker, S. R., Samad, H. A., Ali, R. & Barnes, D. F. Who Benefits Most from Rural Electrification? Evidence in India World Bank Policy Research Working Paper (World Bank, 2012).

  32. 32.

    Smith, K. R. et al. Millions dead: how do we know and what does it mean? Methods used in the comparative risk assessment of household air pollution. Annu. Rev. Public Health 35, 185–206 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    The Impact of Energy on Women’s Lives in Rural India (ESMAP, 2004);

  34. 34.

    Lenz, L., Munyehirwe, A., Peters, J. & Sievert, M. Does large-scale infrastructure investment alleviate poverty? Impacts of Rwanda’s electricity access roll-out program. World Dev. 89, 88–110 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Acharya, R. H. & Sadath, A. C. Implications of energy subsidy reform in India. Energy Policy 102, 453–462 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Sehgal, M., Rizwan, S. A. & Krishnan, A. Disease burden due to biomass cooking-fuel-related household air pollution among women in India. Glob. Health Action 7, 25326 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Cowan, R. S. More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave (Basic Books, 1983).

  38. 38.

    Winther, T., Matinga, M. N., Ulsrud, K. & Standal, K. Women’s empowerment through electricity access: scoping study and proposal for a framework of analysis. J. Dev. Eff. 9, 389–417 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Sovacool, B. K. et al. The energy–enterprise–gender nexus: lessons from the Multifunctional Platform (MFP) in Mali. Renew. Energy 50, 115–125 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Thomas, D. Intra-household resource allocation: an inferential approach. J. Hum. Resour. 25, 635–664 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Eisenhardt, K. M. Building theories from case study research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14, 532–550 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research (Aldine, 1967).

  43. 43.

    Yin, R. K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods 2nd edn (Sage, 1994).

  44. 44.

    Stinchcombe, A. L. The Logic of Social Research (Univ. of Chicago Press, 2005).

  45. 45.

    Watters, J. K. & Biernacki, P. Targeted sampling—options for the study of hidden populations. Soc. Probl. 36, 416–430 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Eisenhardt, K. M. Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Acad. Manag. J. 32, 543–576 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Kanagawa, M. & Nakata, T. Assessment of access to electricity and the socio-economic impacts in rural areas of developing countries. Energy Policy 36, 2016–2029 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Feller, A. & Gelman, A. in Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences (eds Scott, R. & Kosslyn, S.) 1–16 (John Wiley & Sons, 2015).

  49. 49.

    Cinelli, C. & Hazlett, C. Making Sense of Sensitivity: Extending Omitted Variable Bias. R package—Sensemakr: Sensitivity Analysis Tools for OLS Working Paper (2018).

Download references


We thank the Gujarat Institute of Development Research, the School for International Training (SIT) and ANANDI and its partner organization Mahila Swaraj Munch. We thank J. Andharia, the Executive Director of ANADI, and T. Nair at the Gujarat Institute of Development Research for their assistance in the planning and execution of this study. We thank V. Parmar for his translation assistance. The inductive study was conducted as part of the M.R’s participation in the SIT India Sustainable Development and Social Change Programme. We thank G. Morgan and participants of the GAP Conference, Clean Technologies in Developing Countries, at the University of Pittsburgh for their helpful feedback on earlier drafts of the manuscript.

Author information




M.R. developed the initial concept for the overall study and designed, executed and contributed to the writing of the inductive portion of the study. D.E.A. contributed to the research design and the data analysis for the inductive study, to the research design and the data analysis for the generalizability study, and to the overall writing of the paper. M.A. contributed to the research design and data analysis of the generalizability study, as well as to the overall writing of the entire paper. P.J. contributed to the research design for the inductive study and contributed to the overall writing of the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Erian Armanios.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Application questionnaire, Supplementary Figs. 1 and 2 and Tables 1–22.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rosenberg, M., Armanios, D.E., Aklin, M. et al. Evidence of gender inequality in energy use from a mixed-methods study in India. Nat Sustain 3, 110–118 (2020).

Download citation

Further reading


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing