% =====================================================================
%  figures_and_tables.tex
%  A float-only version of the paper: EVERY figure and table (main text
%  + supplement), each with its caption and label, and NO body text.
%
%  Compile with pdfLaTeX + BibTeX (biblatex, backend=bibtex).
%  - Figures come from ./figures, tables from ./tables (both generated by the
%    do-files); the non-code images live in ../Static.
%  - Scalar macros (\abate, \durability, ...) are read from ./0scalars.tex and
%    the bibliography from ./BD_bibliography.bib (both shipped in this folder).
% =====================================================================
\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage[letterpaper,margin=2cm]{geometry}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{array}
\usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{ragged2e}
\usepackage{placeins}
\usepackage{xspace}

% custom commands used in captions/tables
\newcommand{\tco}{tCO$_2 e$\xspace}
\newcommand{\co}{CO$_2 e$\xspace}
\newcommand{\PM}{$\mu$g/m$^3$\xspace}

% generated figures live in ./figures; non-code images in ../Static
\graphicspath{{./}{../Static/}}
\makeatletter
\def\input@path{{./}}
\makeatother

% scalar macros referenced in some captions and in Table 2
\input{0scalars}

\usepackage[backend=bibtex,natbib=true,style=authoryear,
    doi=false,isbn=false,url=false,eprint=false,
    giveninits=true,
    mincitenames=1, maxcitenames=3, minbibnames=5, maxbibnames=6,
    uniquename=false, uniquelist=minyear]{biblatex}
\addbibresource{BD_bibliography.bib}
\DeclareCiteCommand{\citeyear}
  {\usebibmacro{prenote}}
  {\printtext[bibhyperref]{\printfield{year}\printfield{extradate}}}
  {\multicitedelim}
  {\usebibmacro{postnote}}

\usepackage[colorlinks=true, filecolor=blue, urlcolor=blue, linkcolor=blue, citecolor=blue]{hyperref}

\begin{document}
\pagestyle{empty}

% =====================================================================
% MAIN-TEXT FIGURES AND TABLES
% =====================================================================

\begin{figure}[t!]
\caption[]{Additionality with additional and non-additional payments} \label{fig:cc_inframarginal}\centering\vspace{-1em}
    \includegraphics[trim = 0 5mm -10mm 0, clip, width=0.9\textwidth]{figures/Inframarginal_constrained_mass.png} \\
    \includegraphics[trim = -5mm 0 0 20mm, clip, width=0.85\textwidth]{figures/Inframarginal_constrained_mass.png} \\
    \vspace{-0.5em}
    \noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:} Demand curve elicited through an incentive-compatible willingness-to-pay exercise. The market price was US\$40 at the time of the study. A low or high subsidy of US\$14 or US\$29 reduces the price to US\$26 or US\$11, respectively.
    Non-additional buyers would buy the stove even with the low subsidy but still receive increased subsidy payments when the subsidy is increased. Additionality is the total number of purchases that arise for each additional US\$1 of subsidy expenditure.
\end{figure}

\clearpage

\begin{figure}[t!]\caption{Impact of improved stove ownership on measures of charcoal usage}  \label{fig:TC}
    \begin{minipage}[t]{0.425\textwidth} \centering
    1 month later{\color{white}{y}} \vspace{2mm} \\ \hrule
    \vspace{2mm}
    \end{minipage}~~~
    \begin{minipage}[t]{0.27\textwidth} \centering
    1 year later  \vspace{2mm} \\ \hrule \vspace{2mm}
    \end{minipage}~~
    \begin{minipage}[t]{0.27\textwidth} \centering
    3.5 years later \vspace{2mm} \\ \hrule \vspace{2mm}
    \end{minipage} \\ %(a) Ash \\ (kg) \\
            \includegraphics[width=0.14\columnwidth]{figures/TCbucket_kg.png}%(b) SMSes \\ (USD) \\
            \includegraphics[width=0.14\columnwidth]{figures/TCamount_weekly.png} %(c) Survey \\ (USD) \\
            \includegraphics[width=0.14\columnwidth]{figures/TCg_char_week_v3_USD.png} %(d) SMSes \\ (USD) \\
            \includegraphics[width=0.14\columnwidth]{figures/TCamount_weekly_1yr.png}%(e) Survey \\ (USD) \\
            \includegraphics[width=0.14\columnwidth]{figures/TCel1_g_char_week_USD.png}%(f) PM2.5 \\ ($\mu$g/m$^3$) \\
            \includegraphics[width=0.14\columnwidth]{figures/TCpm2_5_atm.png}% (g) Survey \\ (USD) \\
            \includegraphics[width=0.14\columnwidth]{figures/TCb_expend7_USD.png}\\[-1em] ~\\
    \noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:}
    The left bar represents the mean among non-owners.
    The right bar represents the control mean plus the treatment effect (with standard error bars) from an instrumental variables regression (\autoref{tab:worldwide}).
    A: weight of ash generated by one month of charcoal usage.
    B,D: charcoal expenditures reported in recurring 3-day SMSes collected over a 30 day period.
    C,G: charcoal expenditures as reported during in-person surveys.
    E: charcoal expenditures as reported during a phone survey one year after the baseline (due to COVID-19, no in-person surveys were conducted in 2020).
    F: pollution exposure collected by Purple Air devices during cooking hours.
\end{figure}

\clearpage

\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{Subsidy cost per ton of \co abated} \label{tab:aggresult}
\centering\addtolength{\tabcolsep}{4pt}
\begin{tabular}{lrr}
\toprule
~    & \shortstack{Low \\ subsidy}
    & \shortstack{High \\ subsidy} \\ \midrule
\input{tables/additionality.txt}\\[-1em]
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}\\[0.5em]
\noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Note:} $^a$As an illustrative example, we perform calculations as if there are 100 households.
Row (2) is derived from the demand curve in \autoref{fig:cc_inframarginal} in Sec.~4.1.
Row (3) is row (2) times 100.
Row (4) is row (1) times row (3).
Rows (5) and (6) are the difference between the high subsidy and low subsidy for rows (4) and (3), respectively.
Row (7) is row (5) divided by row (6).
Row (8) is derived from \autoref{fig:TC} in Sec.~4.2 (each stove purchase increases stove ownership by on average \durability years and abates \downcoyear \tco per year).
Row (9) is row (7) divided by row (8).
\end{table}

\clearpage

\begin{table}[t!]
\caption{Results under alternative assumptions }\label{tab:opportunitiesmore}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1pt}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.1}\centering
\begin{tabular}[t]{
    >{\centering}p{0.1\textwidth}
    >{\raggedright}p{0.69\textwidth}
    >{\centering\arraybackslash}m{0.17\textwidth} }
\toprule
Scenario & Description &
    %\multicolumn{1}{c}{Title}    &
    \multicolumn{1}{c}{\shortstack{Subsidy spending \\  per ton of\\ \co abated}}   \\
    \midrule
~ & Paper estimate \newline \emph{Sharp breakage assumptions; fNRB of 38\%; firewood-to-charcoal ratio of 4:1} & \abate \\
\midrule
(1) & Assuming quadratic breakage & \abateliblo   \\
%(2) & (1) plus linear breakage after 3.5 years down to 0\% after 4.5 years & \abatelibhi \\
\addlinespace[0.5em]
(2) & Assuming an fNRB of 10\% & \abatefnrblo \\
(3) & Assuming an fNRB of 100\% & \abatefnrbhi \\
\addlinespace[0.5em]
(4) & Assuming a firewood-to-charcoal conversion ratio of 6-to-1 & \abateratiosix \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}\\[0.5em]
\noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Note:} Sensitivity of the estimated subsidy cost per ton of \co abated to alternative assumptions about ownership duration, the fraction of non-renewable biomass (fNRB), and the upstream charcoal
  production process. The ``Paper estimate'' reproduces the headline result from \autoref{tab:aggresult}.
  Scenario (1) replaces the sharp breakage step-function with a quadratic breakage function (\autoref{fig:durability} shows these assumptions visually).
  Scenarios (2) and (3) bracket the fNRB assumption at 10\% and 100\%, respectively, holding all other assumptions at their baseline values.
  Scenario (4) revises the upstream emissions factor by assuming a firewood-to-charcoal mass conversion ratio of 6-to-1, near the upper end of the range reported in the kiln-efficiency literature, which raises the non-combustion emissions per kilogram of charcoal burned. Across all scenarios considered, the abatement cost remains below US\$10 per \tco---well under the EPA's most
  conservative Social Cost of Carbon estimate of US\$120 (EPA, \citeyear{EPA2023_SC_GHG}).
\end{table}

\clearpage

\setlength{\fboxsep}{0.5pt}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\caption[]{Biomass stove users across the world} \label{fig:worldmap}\centering\vspace{-1em}
\fbox{\includegraphics[trim = 13mm 0 13mm 0, clip, width=0.48\textwidth]{figures/worldmap_charcoal.png}}
\fbox{\includegraphics[trim = 13mm 0 13mm 0, clip, width=0.48\textwidth]{figures/worldmap_wood.png}} \\
    \noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:} Number of charcoal and wood users in countries where census data indicate at least 1 million charcoal users or at least 1 million wood users. \autoref{tab:charcoalhh} provides additional details and data sources.
\end{figure}

\clearpage

% =====================================================================
% SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURES AND TABLES  (S-numbering)
% =====================================================================
\renewcommand\thefigure{S\arabic{figure}}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\renewcommand\thetable{S\arabic{table}}
\setcounter{table}{0}

\begin{figure}[h!]\caption{Kenyan Ceramic Jiko and energy efficient stove}\label{fig:jikojikokoa}\centering
[proprietary image]  \\
\noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:} Reproduced from \citep{Berkouwer2022}. On the left is the traditional \emph{jiko}. On the right is the energy efficient stove. The two stoves use the same type of charcoal and the same process for cooking food, hence the energy efficient stove requires essentially no learning to use. After usage, the user disposes of the ash using the tray at the bottom. The central chamber of the energy efficient stove is constructed using insulating materials.
\end{figure}

\clearpage

\begin{figure}[h!]
\caption{Approximate respondent locations across Nairobi}\label{fig:map}
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{"../Static/RespondentsNairobi_Overview.png"}\\
\noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:}  Approximate locations of study participants' home residences across Nairobi, Kenya. Reproduced from \citep{Berkouwer2022}.\\ ~
\end{figure}

\clearpage

 \begin{figure}[h!]
    \caption{Timeline of field activities}\label{fig:timeline}
    \includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{"../Static/TimelinePres".pdf}
    \noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:} Participants who purchased the stove did so during the main visit ($t=0$).
    For 89\% of respondents the long-term endline was conducted 3.4--3.7 years after the main visit.
    Child anthropometrics were collected on either drop-off or pickup depending on presence.
    Due to health restrictions, the 2020 survey was conducted by phone.
\end{figure}

\clearpage

\begin{figure}[h!]
\caption{BDM Hidden price distribution}\label{fig:hiddenpricedist}
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{../Static/FigureA4_PriceDistributionMain_USD.png}\\
\noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:} Reproduced from \citep{Berkouwer2022}. The distribution of prices $P_i$ used in the BDM elicitation mechanism. 6\% of participants are allocated a price drawn from $U[3.50, 4.50]$, 39\% of participants are allocated a price drawn from $U[10, 12]$, and 44\% of participants are allocated a price drawn from $U[25, 27]$. The remaining prices are drawn from a uniform distribution over the entire interval $U[0.01, 29.99]$. Respondents buy the stove if and only if $WTP_i\geq P_i$.
\end{figure}

\clearpage

\begin{figure}[t!]\caption{Extrapolation between and after visits to estimate stove-year additionality}\label{fig:durability}
    \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth} \centering
    Method 1: \\ Sharp drops \\
    \includegraphics[trim = 1mm 5mm 0 0, clip, width=1\columnwidth]{figures/cons1.png}%(b) SMSes \\ (USD) \\
    \end{minipage}
    \begin{minipage}[t]{0.4\textwidth} \centering
    Method 2: \\ Quadratic function \\
    \includegraphics[trim =  1mm 5mm 0 0, clip, width=1\columnwidth]{figures/consquad.png}%(b) SMSes \\ (USD) \\
    \end{minipage}
    \centering\includegraphics[trim = 0 1mm 0 2.1cm, clip, width=0.55\columnwidth]{figures/cons1.png} \\
    \noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:} The dots show the observed improved stove ownership rates separated by those who bought the improved stove during the initial visit and those who did not. During the 42-month visit ownership of a working stove was established by visual inspection of the stove by an independent research staff member. The 12-month visit took place in September 2020; for public health reasons this survey was conducted by phone. The lines show interpolations across these points using two different methods. Method 1 assumes immediately after the one year endline ownership changes to what was observed 3.5 years later, and that ownership drops to zero immediately after the 3.5 year endline survey: this is the more conservative method, offering a lower bound on durability, and we therefore use it for the main calculations in the text.
    Method 2 assumes a quadratic fit.
    Method 1 generates an estimated \durabilityj stove lifetime; method 2 yields \durabilitylibay years. After netting out adoption in the control group, this results in an additional \durability or \durabilityliba years of working stove ownership, respectively.
\end{figure}

\clearpage

\begin{table}[h!]
\vspace{-1em}
\centering
\caption{Instrumental variables estimates of the effect of improved stove ownership on various independent measures of charcoal usage}\label{tab:worldwide}
\addtolength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}\vspace{-1mm}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.8}
\begin{tabular}{lccccccccccc}
\vspace{-4mm}\\
\toprule
\input{tables/Table2_IVcharcoal_PAPER} \\[-1em]
\hline
\end{tabular} \\
\noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:} Results from instrumental variables regressions in which the randomly assigned subsidy is an instrument for whether the respondent owns the improved stove to estimate the impact of improved stove ownership on various outcomes.
Column (a) uses the weight of ash generated through charcoal stove usage.
Columns (b) and (d) use self-reported weekly charcoal expenditures collected through a recurring SMS survey (standard errors clustered by respondent).
Columns (c) and (g) use self-reported weekly charcoal expenditures collected through in-person surveys.
Column (e) uses self-reported weekly charcoal expenditures collected through a phone survey (due to COVID-19, no in-person surveys were conducted in 2020).
Column (f) uses PM2.5 data collected by Purple Air II sensors (in \PM).
The baseline survey was conducted in May-June 2019. The 1-month follow-up survey was conducted in June-July 2019.
Regressions control for baseline charcoal spending, income, wealth, risk aversion, credit constrainedness, household size, and beliefs about stove benefits.
\end{table}

\clearpage

\begin{figure}[t!]
\caption{Supply curve of abatement at different subsidy levels}\label{fig:supplycurve}\vspace{-1em}
\centering \includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{"figures/supplycurve.png"} \\[-1em]
\noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:} This graph plots the total abatement, total cost, average cost, and marginal cost for subsidies of \{0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40\} applied to a US\$40 competitive market price. This graph assumes that the demand curves for the 54.3 million households that use charcoal as their primary cooking fuel are similar in demand and usage as our research sample. At all quantities, the average and marginal abatement costs are below the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA)'s most conservative Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) estimate of US\$120 (EPA, \citeyear{EPA2023_SC_GHG}).
\end{figure}

\clearpage

\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Households using charcoal and wood as primary fuels} \label{tab:charcoalhh}
\small \centering\addtolength{\tabcolsep}{1pt}
\begin{tabular}{lrrrl}
\toprule
Country
    & \shortstack{Households \\ (millions) }
    & \shortstack{Charcoal\\ households \\ (millions) }
    & \shortstack{Wood\\ households \\ (millions) }
    & Source \\ \toprule
\input{tables/charcoalwoodtable.txt}\\[-1em]
\bottomrule
\end{tabular} \\[1em]
\noindent \justifying \footnotesize \emph{Notes:}  Charcoal or wood households are those that use charcoal or wood as their primary cooking fuel, respectively. The table shows numbers of households in countries where census data either lists
    at least 1 million households as using charcoal or
    at least 5 million households using either charcoal or wood as their primary daily cooking fuel.
Some countries may be missing.
\end{table}

\end{document}
