Off‐Farm Employment and Rural Energy Transitions: A Systematic Review of Pathways and Gaps

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:GX researchers studying energy transition in developing countries can use the consolidated typology and identified pathways to guide further empirical work.

🏢実務担当者:Practitioners in rural development can leverage the finding that off-farm employment is a key driver for modern energy adoption, suggesting integrated livelihood and energy programs.

🏛政策担当者:Policymakers in LMICs should consider promoting off-farm employment as a strategy to accelerate household energy transitions, alongside targeted energy subsidies.

ABSTRACT Transitioning to clean and affordable energy is a persistent development challenge for rural populations in low‐ and middle‐income countries, where dependence on traditional biomass‐based fuels continues to dominate. Although off‐farm employment has gained increasing attention as a driver of rural livelihood transformation, its specific relationship with household energy transition remains underexplored in the academic literature. This limitation is evident in the tendency of existing studies to examine off‐farm income effects in general terms, often overlooking the distinct mechanisms through which off‐farm employment may influence household energy transition decisions. Moreover, there is notable conceptual inconsistency in how household energy types are categorized within the energy transition literature, with limited efforts to develop a consolidated typology. To address this knowledge gap, this study conducts a PRISMA‐guided systematic review of 34 peer‐reviewed studies published between 2015 and 2024, drawing data from 3 leading academic databases. The findings consolidate fragmented energy type classifications into a clearer typology and reveal a generally positive association between off‐farm employment and household adoption of modern energy sources—such as electricity, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), and solar energy—alongside a reduction in reliance on traditional biomass fuels. This relationship appears to operate primarily through two pathways: (i) increased household income, which improves affordability of modern energy technologies, and (ii) reduced time and labor burdens associated with biomass fuel collection. Nevertheless, the review identifies a critical gap in the literature: the effects of different forms and qualities of off‐farm employment on household energy decisions remain underemphasized. Overall, these insights reduce conceptual ambiguity and differentiate this review from earlier literature by linking rural labor diversification directly to household energy transition outcomes, thereby advancing a more precise understanding of rural energy transition dynamics.

• openalex https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.70239first seen 2026-05-17 07:22:54 · last seen 2026-05-20 05:16:26