LIGHTING DEVICES TEST RESULTS Ethiopia Results June 2009

LIGHTING DEVICES TEST RESULTSEthiopia Results

June 2009

© 2008 International Finance Corporation – The World Bank All Rights Reserved Ethiopia 2

Report Overview

1 Lighting Africa Overview / Market Intelligence Program

2 Market Research Approach

3 Lighting Devices Testing: Setting the Scene

4 Lighting Devices Tested

5 How Do We Assess Potential?

6 Brief Country Overview

7 Main Product Findings By Country

8 Recommendations By Country

9 Executive Summary

LIGHTING AFRICA OVERVIEW /MARKET INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM


What is Lighting Africa?

Lighting Africa is a World Bank – IFC initiative aimed at supporting the global lighting industry to catalyze a robust market for off-grid lighting products tailored to the needs of African consumers.

The Program’s mission is to make affordable, environmentally sustainable, durable, and safe lighting available to the masses, who currently depend on kerosene lanterns and candles to satisfy their lighting needs.


How does Lighting Africa support the development the lighting market?

The Lighting Africa program is a market-based approach, grounded in the recognition that:

There is a considerable commercial market opportunity and willingness to pay for off-grid lighting, substantiated by annual expenditures on kerosene amounting to $38 billion and $17 billion, globally and in Sub-Saharan Africa, respectively

Recent technological advancements in lighting, particularly in the area of Light-Emitting Diodes (LED), demonstrate increased promise to deliver affordable technological solutions tailored to the African marketplace and beyond

The most expedient and sustainable way to bring affordable, reliable lighting to Africa is by supporting the industry to design and deliver an array of products tailored to the needs of African consumers


How do we ensure Lighting Africa program activities respond to industry need?

All Lighting Africa program activities are designed with and for theindustry and other stakeholders

Through ongoing consultation with a wide array of stakeholders(including private companies, NGOs, financiers, governments and otherkey players along the supply chain) opportunities are identified whereLighting Africa can play an appropriate role in accelerating the off-gridlighting market in Africa


Lighting Africa: Program Areas

Policy: Addressing policy and regulatory barriers Financing: Improving access to finance along the distribution chain- for

example through partnership with financial institutions Product Quality Assurance: Addressing issues of quality with lighting

products to help consumers make informed purchase decisions and prevent market spoilage

Business-to-Business Linkages: Creating opportunities for different players along international supply chain to meet, exchange information and create business partnerships

Market Intelligence: Collecting & disseminating key market information to support successful market penetration

Business Environment: Facilitating market entry through the provision of relevant information, such as country-specific policy and regulatory information


What has the market research provided?

Key Market Information on consumer needs, preferences and finances.

The information has: Informed on the desired functionality and design attributes of different types

of lighting products within several product classes (Torch, Floodlight, Task Light, Lantern, Spot Light)

Enabled the industry to overcome potential challenges that are likely to accompany market entry in the African off-grid lighting market

Created a baseline to quantify the size of potential market segments in volume and value terms


Lighting Africa: Why Market Research?

While anecdotal evidence shows a substantial opportunity in the off-grid lighting market in Africa, much of the industry lacks the information needed to develop and market products appropriate to meet the needs of African consumers

This is the result of a premature and undeveloped market, but one with demonstrable potential – the fuel-based lighting market in Africa is currently worth more than $17 billion per year – yet is still largely undefined, untapped, and unrealized

In response to the industry’s call to provide greater comprehension to the scope of this emergent market opportunity, Lighting Africa developed a Market Research program

MARKET RESEARCH APPROACH


Research International: Background and Related Experience

The research was conducted by Research International East Africa, a subsidiary of the global market research firm: Research International is one of the world's largest custom market research agencies, with offices in 50 countries worldwide and over 30 years of expertise.


Research Methodology

Currently, the Lighting Africa market research program covers 5 countries: Ghana, Kenya, Zambia, Ethiopia and Tanzania

Two key market segments: households & micro-businesses in rural and urban areas

The market study involves studies of the market in Africa to provide insights that form the basis for innovative product ideas; and is comprised of three research methods:

1. An exploratory phase involving a qualitative product testing element2. A quantitative Habits and Attitudes survey of the population3. Quantitative Lighting Devices Testing, using the proprietary eValuateTM methodology, to quantify the acceptance and likely uptake of existing, new and revised product ideas for the market in Africa

LIGHTING DEVICES TESTING: SETTING THE SCENE


Lighting Devices Testing Context

The purpose of the lighting devices research is to:

– Assess consumer acceptance and potential for each of the lighting devices tested within the context of norms

– Prioritise and provide guidance as to which products to take forward to the next stage of development

HOW DO WE ASSESS POTENTIAL?


Sample structure

Twenty interviews were conducted per country Main purchasing decision makers were interviewed both prior to use and after recall.

Consumers also filled out a questionnaire during usage of the test lights. Interviews were conducted in peoples’ homes to ensure that observations were made

about the space lit and the kind of lighting used

LOCATION LSM NO.OF INTERVIEWS

Urban 1-4 1-5

Urban 5-10 6-10

Rural 1-4 11-15

Rural 5-10 16-20

Ethiopia


Is the idea genuinely new and unique?

Is it relevant to you?Is the idea clear to you? Do you find it exciting?

How often would you buy it?

Do you believe it?Do you think it would offer

value for money?Do you actually like the

idea?

Key Questions Asked To Qualitatively Evaluate Lighting Devices

Would you buy it?

Supported by spontaneous likes and dislikes


Key qualitative questions

Interviews focused on answering these questions:

Who is the consumer? Consumer demographics and characteristics of householdsHow does the consumer use light? Current lighting habits, attitudes, preferences and needs How do consumers perceive the products? Assessment of the new products versus product characteristics,

features, learning and marketing approach What does the consumer want? Assessment of needs for current lighting in and around the homeWhich products do consumers prefer? Product preferences (performance and design features) and

developing a quality standard for lighting How much is the consumer willing to pay? Consumer economics (intent and capacity to pay for lighting)


Predicting the likelihood of successful product launch

What we know about successful product launches is that there is a lot more at stake than merely identifying which products should be launched versus which shouldn’t. In predicting the likelihood of a successful product launch we must also identify key drivers that will ensure long term success

Within developing markets, measures of new product success are slightly different from other parts of the world. In developing markets consumers have little disposable income which means their behaviour with regards to new purchases will be quite conservative – they will not take chances buying into new products if they are not sure whether the product will work for them or not

In order to predict the likelihood of successful product launch, it is important to understand 3 critical measures: the “WHAT?”, the “WHY?” and the “WOW?”. These will be discussed in further detail in the next slides

Additional to these three measures, it must be kept in mind that the cost of the new product, in this case the lighting device, will undoubtedly remain a main driver in creating purchase intent amongst consumers with low levels of disposable income


The WHAT? Test

The WHAT test involves a check of the consumers’ understanding of the various lighting devices under consideration

For the lighting devices to be successful in the market, consumers need to be sure that the lighting devices:

Have a recognisable point of difference, i.e. that it is better than what they are using currently or that it could impact and improve their life in a significant manner

Are understood – it has to be clear how the devices will work

The product must have a recognisable point of difference


The WHY? Test

The WHY test involves a check of the consumers’ need for the various lighting devices under consideration

For the lighting devices to be successful in the market, consumers need to be convinced that they will be relevant to their lifestyle

If the lighting device is perceived to be technologically ‘too advanced’ or too difficult to operate, consumers will feel alienated– it will be perceived as a device for ‘them’- i.e. those people who have more money, and not for ‘me’

This point of difference has to be perceived as a benefit


The WOW? Test

The WOW test involves a check of the consumers’ excitement for the various lighting devices under consideration

For the lighting devices to be successful in the market, consumers need to be convinced that the devices will be innovative and creative

If the devices do not stand out from what is in the market currently, they won’t generate sufficient interest from consumers to encourage purchase and substitution away from other product types

This benefit must be exciting enough to overcome barriers to trial and usage


Traffic light rating system

A traffic light system has been used to report the overall rating provided by the respondents for the features and characteristics of each of the lighting devices:

Overall, the respondents were positive about the specific feature/characteristic+

+/-Overall, the respondents were positive about the specific feature/characteristic, however some respondents had remarks that require attention

- Overall, the respondents were negative about the specific feature/characteristic

BRIEF COUNTRY OVERVIEW

Ethiopia


Brief Country Overview: Ethiopia

Ethiopia

Interesting facts:

Ethiopia’s economy is poverty stricken; with agriculture accounting for almost 50% of the GDP.

Existing legislature prohibits outright land ownership and prevents the use of land as collateral, which stifles budding entrepreneurs.

Eight out of ten Ethiopians are engaged in agriculture. Therefore the seasons in Ethiopia greatly influence their lifestyle. Kiremt, which falls between June and September is the main rainy season in which most of the food crop of the country is produced.

ELECTRICITY


Suggestions for improvement living standards

Electricity supply Water/ tap water Better roads Opportunities for business/ income

generation Telephone line

Electricity Clean water Modern toilet Better housing/ building materials Good furniture Increased productivity in farming

Electricity and water are top on the list of suggestions for living standards improvement among most of the respondents interviewed. Accessibility is also a major concern as many people mentioned better roads as a suggestion for improvement.

We want to have electricity, we already paid the municipality…..but they are yet to connect the line Male, Urban, Lower LSM

Surrounding In-home


Likes and dislikes of not having electricity

My daughter cannot study at night Male, Urban, Lower LSM

Primarily because we lack electricity we are forced to live in the dark, secondly we can’t follow television programs which are essential to our life Male, Rural, Higher LSM

Alternative lighting sources Dislikes of not having electricity

• Kerosene lamp

• Dry cells connected to light bulb

(home made)

• Candle

• Hand torch

Unable to study properly in the evening (especially children)

Have to travel for a long distance to charge their mobile phone

Lack of information and entertainment

Restricted activities in the evening

Health hazards and eye problems due to smoking devices

Cannot power household equipment

No chilled water


Electricity connection usage & attitudes

Connection Likelihood Determinants of

connection

Perceived benefits of

connection

Barriers to connection

0-3 months Financial situation

Willingness of the

government to deliver

Proximity to the city

Lighting

Cooking (baking Injera)

Charging mobile phones

Better health (no smoke from

kerosene lamps)

Security/ protection from wild

animals

Entertainment

Cost of connection

Government

unwillingness

Remoteness of their

location

3-6 months

6-12 months

12 months

plus

Not likely

Most of the respondents felt that they were not likely to get connected to the national grid soon. Others felt that since they had paid for the electricity connection at the municipality a while ago, it was likely that they would be connected within 6 months to one year.

Ranging from = few respondents to = many respondents

LIGHTING


Current lighting situation

I have a good lighting device which uses batteries. So far it is suitable for my life. I have given up using the kerosene lamp I used to have Male, Rural, Higher LSM

We have light which we get from the kerosene lamp. It is not bright and it doesn’t work when there is not enough kerosene left, it also produces very dark smoke Male, Rural, Higher LSM

Currently, we get light from the kerosene lamp. It is not bright and it produces black smoke which is harmful to our eyes. The light that we get from this lamp does not allow us to see all the places in the house… Male, Rural. Higher LSM


Current Lighting Product- Usage

Product Used Currently

Most Often Used Least Often Used

Lapsed usage

1.Candles

2. Firewood

3. Torch

4. Hurricane Lamp

5. Kerosene Lamp

6. Dry cells connected to bulbs (home made lamps)

6. Other (Electrical rechargeable light)

Kerosene and home made lamps (bulbs connected to dry cells) are the most commonly used lighting devices in Ethiopia. Torches are especially used for going out at night for example to check on the livestock.


Summary of lighting products presently used

ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES

Firewood Produces too much smoke The smoke discolours the roof and the walls

Kerosene lamp Affordable Durable Easily available

Dangerous; can cause fire Causes eye and breathing problems Produces very dark smoke Rising cost of kerosene Dim light

Dry cells connected to bulbs (Home made)

Economical No smoke produced

Cost of batteries/dry cells

Candles Affordable Not harmful to one’s health Easily available

Dim light Does not last long Poor eyesight due to inadequate lighting

Torch Portable Not blown out by wind when outside

Cost of batteries/dry cells

Other (Electrical Rechargeable device)

Bright No breathing problems/suffocation Safe

Cost Fragile


Choice determinants & influencers of current lighting product

Brightness of the light Safety Ease of use One that does not produce smoke Running cost per month/affordability Durability

Husband Wife Children (their need to study is prioritized) Children (are perceived to have

knowledge about best products currently available)

Usage determinants Key influencers

In general, husbands -who are the breadwinners in most of the cases - decide which lighting product is used in the house. However, some wives and children also have a say.


Current lighting products – bring it alive


Current lighting productsdifferent settings

We use our kerosene lamp from 1800hrs to 0000hrs, we use it in our main room because most of the time our families stay in the main room Male, rural, higher LSM

I only use candles at night after 1900hrs and I use a torch when I want to go out of the house to control the cattle or to go to the lavatories Male, urban, lower LSM

I use the candles in the dining or sitting room where we spend most of our time, and I use the torch when I cook because it is easy to move it around Female, urban, lower LSM

We place our lighting product on the wall because it is safe from any danger Male, urban, lower LSM

You cannot take the kerosene lamp outside the house because of the wind, so you should use the hand torch Female, urban, lower LSM

I just use one lighting device for different settings, I move it carefully from one room to another Male, rural, higher LSM


Product Used Overall satisfaction Suggestions for improvement

Candles Replace with electricity

Firewood Replace with electricity

Torch Replace with electricity

Dry cells connected to bulbs

(Homemade)

Brighter illumination Cheaper batteries

Kerosene lamp Replace with electricity

Very satisfiedNot satisfied

Current Lighting Products-satisfaction rating


Current lighting productsideal lighting

Electricity/Electric light bulb Not very big; so easy to carry it from one place to another

Powerful bright light Healthier (does not produce smoke) Portable so that it can be used in different settings Affordable

All the respondents felt that connection to electricity would solve their lighting problems. Nevertheless, their ideal product should be portable, bright and should not produce smoke.

Key featuresIdeal product

MAIN PRODUCT FINDINGS

TM41

TEST PRODUCT EVALUATIONBefore Placement


Test product usagedemonstration

TM41


Overall evaluation

Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

This product is perceived to be different especially because it operates on solar energy. However this is not a new concept in Ethiopia as most of the respondents use a similar home made device which consists of light bulbs powered by dry cells. TM41 is nevertheless considered very relevant because it produces bright light without smoke and does not have running costs.

Test Product evaluation

none very

TM41


What comes to mind when you see this

product

?

Test product associationTM41

It has a unique shape, I have never seen such a

thing before

The shape, the colour, the power of the light

It does not have any electricity cost or

smoke Batteries look strong and heavy

It is convenient, it looks like vehicle

lights

One of the most striking things about the product is the brightness of the light, it is actually likened to a vehicle lights.


1. Design

2. Brightness

3. Shape

4. Solar charging system

I like everything I see from the device such as the design Male,

urban, lower LSM

I like the brightness of the light, the shape, the charging system

and the colour of the product Male, urban, lower LSM

I like the brightness of the light, the shape, and the size of the

device Male, rural, higher LSM

I like this product, you can illuminate the house without any

monthly expense because it works on solar energy Male,

urban, lower LSM

Test product evaluation likesTM41


1. It appears to be fragile I dislike the sensitivity of the product, it looks a little bit sensitive,

that it may burn while we are trying to put it outside to absorb

sunlight Male, rural, higher LSM

Test Product Evaluation – Dislikes

TM41


Feature Overall rating Comment

Shape Perceived as unique and attractive

Size Convenient

Design Good, looks like a vehicle light

Controls / Ease of use Easy to control and use

Colours Attractive

Writing/ labeling Not mentioned

Test Product features evaluation

TM41

The product features received a good rating, especially on the aesthetic value which was highly appreciated.


Test Product characteristics

Suggestions for improvement Summary of satisfaction rating

Prolong battery life to one

month to avoid regular

recharging

Quality of service (lighting power)

Reliability of service- battery life/availability

Uniqueness- new & different

A product for someone like me

Ease of use

Respondents are very satisfied with the characteristics of TM41, apart from battery availability and uniqueness of the device

TM41


Overall evaluation

Likelihood to purchase

Worth more than other products

Perceived price

The purchase intent of this product is very high as it produces bright light. However the purchase intent is directly linked to the retail price of the product. It is also perceived to be worth much more than other products again because of the quality of its light.

Purchase Intent & Price

US$ 9.1 – 13.6

TM41


Test productsummary before testing

TM41

This product meets the two most important needs of consumers in Ethiopia; it is a product

with no health risk (no smoke) and without running costs. In addition, respondents like the

brightness of this product as well as the convenient design.

There is only one suggestion for improvement which involves prolonging the battery life to

last for a month when fully charged. This may be arising from the fact that even though

respondents are excited about the solar charging aspect, they are concerned about the long

rainy season between June and September (Kiremt).

The purchase intent of this product is very high because of the quality of the light.

However this is only on condition that the price will be affordable.

TEST PRODUCT EVALUATION After Recall


After placement, the product was seen as different mainly because respondents viewed it as a multipurpose device which can be used in two rooms at the same time. It is also relevant to their lifestyle because they have no access to electricity and it does not have any running costs.

Test product comparative evaluation

Evaluation Before placement After recall

Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

TM41


Feature Rating Comment

Product uniqueness I have never seen a similar device before Female, urban, lower LSM

Lighting adequacy The light was very sufficient for my needs Female, urban, lower LSM

Battery life The batteries are charged by sunlight, but I have doubts on whether it will work during the rainy season (kiremt) Female, urban, lower LSM

Ease of operation I did not encounter any difficulties in operating the device Male, urban, lower LSM

Relevance It is very relevant since I don’t have access to electricity Female, urban, lower LSM

Durability If you use it carefully, I am sure that it is durable and you can use it for a long time Female, urban, lower LSM

Test product evaluation- general characteristics

TM41

The ratings of the product characteristics after product placement were very good. The uniqueness and lighting adequacy of the product were appreciated because of its bright light and its usability in different settings for various purposes. The batteries were perceived to last long when fully charged

“I used it for many hours without worrying that it might run out of batteries” Male, rural, higher LSM

However there were two concerns regarding batteries; they may not work during the rainy season (Kiremt) from June to September, and they may not be available in the market. The durability of the product was rated highly as consumers felt that if the device is handled with care, it could last for a very long time


Feature Ratingbefore

Ratingafter

Comment

Shape It is like an electric lamp

Size Appropriate and releases sufficient lighting

Design Convenient, can be used in two rooms

Controls/ Ease of handling

Hook is not strong, I can not rely on it

Colours Attractive colours


Test Product features comparative evaluation

TM41

The ease of handling does not rate too well because the product is perceived to be weak. Respondents feel they have to take extra care in handling this device and thus it is not very easy to use. On the other hand TM41 is very well rated in terms of the aesthetic features such as shape, size and design. It is perceived as convenient and appropriate as it can be used in two different rooms simultaneously. It is likened to an electric lamp


1. Portability

2. Ease of recharging

3. Solar charging system

4. Brightness of light

5. Multipurpose

I can move it around to any place I want because of its mobility

Female, urban, lower LSM

It can be charged easily with the solar panels Female, rural,

lower LSM

I like the bright light, the charging system and the shape of the two

bulbs Male, urban, lower LSM

It produces a bright light like light from electricity Female, urban,

lower LSM

I can use it in different places for different purposes Female,

urban, lower LSM

Test Product Evaluation – Likes

TM41


1. Malfunctioning lamp Nothing, other than one lamp which was going on and off

sometimes Female, urban, lower LSM

Test Product Evaluation Dislikes& Suggestions for Improvement

TM41

Suggestions for improvement: After testing TM41, respondents were satisfied with the product in general and most did not want to

make any changes to it.

“I wouldn’t want to make any changes to it because I like it as it is” Male, urban, lower LSM

However, there were two concerns raised in the product evaluation: product handling (the product was perceived to be fragile) and the battery availability


Test product evaluationproduct usage

TM41

It is neither hard nor easy to use, but I can master it in a short time Female, rural, higher LSM

I would use it in my home, in different rooms by moving it from place to place

Male, rural, higher LSM

It has dual use at a given time, one for the home and the other for a small room where the animals are staying Female, rural, higher LSM

It is very easy to use, affordable (no running cost), the kids can study, and it has no effect on your health, so it is good for me Female, urban, lower LSM

It is for someone who can handle such a device like me, otherwise the glass might break if it is not handled properly Female, urban, lower LSM

It was clear to the respondents how the product is used. However TM41 was rated on average in terms of ease of use as it was perceived as weak/fragile. Consumers

mentioned that the device needed to be handled with care as the glass looked brittle. Although the respondents did not specify in which rooms they would use the product, it

was clear that they would like to use it in two different rooms simultaneously. It is interesting to note that some of them used it in the livestock shed.


The purchase intent was still very high after recall especially because respondents liked the fact that the product has no running costs. However the purchase intent is directly linked to the retail price.

Test product evaluation pricing & purchase intent

Feature Before Placement After Recall


Worth more than other

products

TM41


Test product pricing scenarios

Pricing Scenarios Amount

US$ Response Reasons

Willingness to pay more than perceived price mentioned before placement

9.1 – 13.6 Because of the quality of the light

Willingness to purchase at the RRP 75.4 That is too expensive

Willingness to purchase if financing is available to offset part of purchase and maintenance cost

It depends on how considerable the financing would be

TM41

After testing the product, the consumers interviewed were willing to pay more than the price they had mentioned previously. They were impressed by the quality of the light, the portability and the zero running costs.

However, most of them were not willing to purchase the device at the recommended retail price as it was perceived as too expensive. Even with the financing option, some of them were still unwilling as they perceived it as too expensive. A few were only willing to purchase the product if the financing offered to offset part of the purchase costs would be substantial.

KO 13




KO 13


Overall evaluation

Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

KO13 is evaluated as unique product by the respondents because they had never seen such a product before that used solar energy

“This is completely different. The available products in the market either use kerosene or dry cells so this is different because it uses sunlight” Female, Urban, lower LSM

Respondents found the product exciting

“Very exciting because it is well designed with options which enable charging it in two ways” Male, urban, lower LSM


none very

KO 13


Excitement that cannot be expressed

in words


product

?

Test product associationKO 13

When I see it lighting, it

is for me some sort of

new life I get

The product is so fine that it will enable my

activities to be easy at night time

Good lighting system

I think this product is very good. I imagine how bright

it will be at night

It is much better

than all the devices I

knew before

The product is associated with lighting which is better than what respondents are currently using. At first sight KO13 causes excitement which can not be expressed in words


1. Bright light

2. The light lasts long

3. Can be suspended from a high point to light the whole room

4. It is economical

5. The charging system which has two options

6. Shape

I can use the light for a long time and it can be suspended at a

higher place to light the whole house Male, rural, upper LSM

I like it because it’s chargeable in a sunny day by solar energy

otherwise by electrical energy Male, rural, upper LSM

Well I like it very much because it is very economical, because it

uses sunlight so it is cost free Male, urban, lower LSM

The shape of the product and the light that comes out of it Female,

rural, upper LSM

I like the bright light of the device, the shape of device and the

labels Female, urban, lower LSM

Test product evaluation likesKO 13


Test Product Evaluation: Dislikes

KO 13

1. None

Respondents did not mention any dislikes for this product. However,

some respondents suggested to make the device bigger.

“I would like to change the bulb to a bigger size”

Male, rural, upper LSM


Feature Overall rating

Comment

Shape Like an egg but strong, good

Size Convenient, small

Design Attractive

Controls / Ease of use Easy

Colours Attractive

Writing/ labeling Good


KO 13

The size of the product is perceived to be small by some respondents who suggested that it should be bigger. They believed that the light was not powerful enough because of its small size.




Make the size of the bulb bigger.





Ease of use

While some respondents thought that the availability of the battery would be an issue, others thought that it would not be the case “I don’t think the availability will be an issue because it will be available, if they produce it” Male, rural, upper LSM

The only suggestion for improvement was on the size of the bulb “I would like to change the bulb to a bigger size” Male, rural, upper LSM

KO 13


Overall evaluation



Price willing to pay

Respondents are likely to purchase the product however this also depends on whether they will be able to afford it

“I say very likely. I’ll buy it if it is not expensive” Male, rural, upper LSM

“I know the price could be more than I mentioned but I estimated it according to my paying ability”

Male, urban, lower LSM

Respondents consider the product to be worth more than other products mainly because it is different

“It is worth much more because it is very different in many ways such as the lighting, it does notcause health problems, it is used for two rooms at a time and more over it is a solar chargeddevice” Male, urban, lower LSM


US $ 6.4 – 9.1

KO 13



KO 13

KO13 is different from any lighting device that respondents have ever seen because of its unique features such as bright light, two charging options and specifically, solar charging. The bright light without smoke makes it relevant to respondents’ lighting needs

Respondents are excited about its design; that it does not produce smoke and has no running costs because it can be charged by solar energy

The general features of the product are well accepted although some respondents think that the size of the bulbs is too small and suggest that it should be made bigger

While some respondents believe that the availability of the battery will be an issue, others think that once the product is in the market, the battery will also be available

Respondents are willing to purchase the product if they are able to afford it once it is in the market

It is worth much more than other products because of its unique features and functionality. It is also thought to be very durable if used carefully

TEST PRODUCT EVALUATION After Placement


The product was evaluated as new and different even after usage

“I find it so different; it helps me to light two different rooms for different purposes” Male, rural, upper LSM

After usage, some respondents thought that the product was not relevant

“Not very relevant because it is getting weaker and weaker after some time so how can we rely on it…” Male, urban, lower LSM


Evaluation Before Placement After Recall

Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

KO 13



Product uniqueness “It is very different because it uses a different power source and

is different in how it is used” Male, urban, lower LSM

Lighting adequacy “The device produces good light which is better than ours, it was

sufficient for our use” Male, rural, upper LSM

Battery life “…it is getting weaker and weaker after some time so how can we rely on it…” Male, urban, lower LSM

Ease of operation “Yes it is good for someone like me. It is easy to use and very economical” Male, urban, lower LSM

Relevance “It is not very relevant for me because I couldn’t carry it and move around” Male, rural, upper LSM

Durability “I think it is durable if you are careful enough in using it. It may serve for a long time that way” Male, rural, upper LSM


KO 13

After product test, some respondents found it irrelevant to their lifestyle because they could not carry it around



Ratingafter

Comment

Shape Good, not good

Size Good

Design Very attractive

Controls / Ease of use

Easy to use

Colours Attractive



KO 13

Overall evaluation of product features remained positive after product test


1. Solar charging

2. No smoke

3. Bright light

4. No running cost

5. The design

6. Lights two rooms at

the same time

I like that it has no running cost and it produces no smoke which

affects health, no breathing problems and no effect on the eyes Male,

urban, lower LSM

I like this product because it gave me a better light than mine Male,

rural, upper LSM

Because it lights two places at the same time Male, urban, lower LSM

It allows me to use it outside hanging from my belt and to use it for

house at other times Male, urban, lower LSM

It gave me a good light without smoke Female, urban, lower LSM


KO 13


1. Unbalanced lighting

2. The light does not last

long

3. Charging may be a

problem when there is

no sunlight

4. Shape

5. Not portable

The unbalanced lighting Male, rural, upper LSM

…but I have some reservations that the batteries might not work in

kiremt /rainy season /(in the absence of sun light) Male, urban,

lower LSM

I don’t like the shape. It is not good but the size is good enough

Male, rural, upper LSM

You can only hang it on a fixed place. You can’t move it from place

to place. It is not mobile Male, rural, upper LSM

I found it a little bit uncomfortable to use because you can’t move it

from place to place Male, rural, upper LSM


KO 13

Suggestions for improvement:

Modify the shape and make it suitable to place it on the table

Increase light intensity


Test product evaluation product usage

KO 13

This device was perceived as easy to use by most of the respondents. A few however initially thought it was difficult to use, but got accustomed to it. It

was mainly used inside the house, in the sitting room, dining room, bedroom and in the kitchen. The device could be used in two different rooms for

different purposes simultaneously.

It was easy, I learned how to use it quickly Male, urban, lower LSM It seemed difficult but when I used it repeatedly it became simple Male, rural, higher

LSM I would use it in my house in the main room only at night and charge it during a sunny

day Female, rural, higher LSM We use it at night when eating our dinner, while cooking, and for studying as well

Male, rural, higher LSM I use this lighting device for the dining room and the bedroom

Female, urban, lower LSM Because I have 3 rooms so that I can light my two rooms at a time. I can stay at my

bedroom while my daughter studies at the saloon Male, urban, lower LSM


Likelihood to purchase was still very high after product test. Respondents were willing to buy the product but again this was also linked to the retail price. On the other hand, those who thought that it was not relevant to them because it could not be carried around, were not willing to purchase it “Yes, if I can afford it, because it is a good device” Female, urban, lower LSM

“No, I don’t think I will purchase it. Because it is not mobile, you cannot move it from place to place Male, rural, upper LSM

After using KO13, the perception of the respondents that it was worth much more than other products did not change. They still thought that it was worth much more because of its functionality “It is worth much more because unlike my device (kerosene lamp), this has a bright light and is not affected by the wind” Male, rural, upper LSM


Feature Before Placement After Recall



KO 13



Pricing Scenarios Amount US$

Response Reasons


6.4 – 9.1 Some respondents cannot afford more than they mentioned before product placement

Willingness to purchase at the RRP 49.6 This would be expensive to some of the respondents


Some respondents still found the price unaffordable, despite the financing option

Willingness to purchase without solar panel (KO13/ HI65 only )

24.8 Are not willing as they would have to travel far to get electricity for recharging

Willingness to purchase solar panel separately Some would be willing as they value the solar charging aspect and this may allow them to look for the money

Purchase price (without solar panel) with monthly AC running cost

25.43 Are not willing as they cannot afford the running costs

KO 13

Some of the respondents were not willing to pay more than they had mentioned before testing the product because they could not afford more despite the fact that they thought the product was unique

Most of the respondents were not willing to purchase it at the recommended retail price as it was considered too expensive

UR 83




UR 83


Overall evaluation

Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

UR83 was positively evaluated as relevant and exciting, respondents were also clear on what to expect from the product. Although the concept was not new to them, they perceived this product to be different because it was powered by solar energy while the available products use dry cells.

“It is very different because the ones that I see in the market use batteries (dry cells)” Male, rural, upper LSM

“It is exciting because I’ve never seen a device that is chargeable only with solar energy” Male, urban, lower LSM

Test Product evaluation UR 83

none very



product

?

Test product associationUR 83

Good design

It is portable because it is small in size.

I expect better lighting capacity

I expect it to produce enough light for my

home It can be kept in the pocket

I think it is a very nice product and easily

chargeable

It has a lot of features that my current lighting device does not have.

UR83 was associated with portability (because of its small size), good design, easy charging and better light (because respondents expected it to have better lighting than what they currently use)


1. Uses solar energy

2. No running costs

3. Causes no health problems (no smoke)

4. Portable

5. Easy to use

6. Unique shape

7. It’s not disturbed by the wind like the kerosene lamp

Because we need to have a lighting device which is free from any cause of health problems Female, urban, lower LSM

Because it is functional with solar energy Male, rural, upper LSM

I like it because it would not be disturbed by wind at night time like the kerosene lamp Female, urban, lower LSM

Because is movable and can be stationed wherever we need it to be. And it is simple to understand Male, urban, lower LSM

Test product evaluation likesUR 83


1. Size

2. Switch design

I dislike the size, it is very small Female, Urban, lower LSM

The bulb glass has a small diameter. If it is bigger it will have

better lighting, I guess Male, Urban, lower LSM

The switch should not slide; a mechanical switch would be better

because the spring will get loose and stop functioning Male,

Urban, lower LSM


UR 83



Shape Like a mobile phone

Size Small, portable, convenient

Design Very simple, nice, good

Controls / Ease of use Convenient, easy to control

Colours Attractive

Writing/ labeling Attractive


UR 83

The product was generally well rated in terms of product features such as shape, design, ease of use, control, colour and writing/labeling

Although the size was rated well, some respondents said that the light bulb was too small and needed to be bigger. They associated the small bulb with inadequate lighting and thought that the bigger the bulb the greater the amount of light produced

“…. I would make the size bigger. The bigger the size of the lighting glass, the more light it gives” Male, Urban, lower LSM


Test Product characteristicsUR 83


Make the size of the bulb bigger Add a cover for the solar panel Replace switch with a

mechanical method Add some support material (e.g.

a stand)





Ease of use

The product was rated highly for all satisfaction measures tested, however respondents thought that the challenge would be the availability of the battery. However because the product is new, battery availability in the local market was expected to be a problem.

While some of the respondents found the light of the UR83 very bright, others said that it was weak and inadequate. This depends on what kind of lighting device respondents are currently using as most respondents compared the UR83 to the light intensity of their own lighting products.

“I am afraid that I won’t be able to find the batteries in the local market because this product is new to us” Male, rural, upper LSM


Overall evaluation




The likelihood to purchase UR83 is high because of its unique features such as solar charging (no running costs) and being smoke free (no health problems) which make it better than what respondents are currently using. However it is directly linked to the affordability of the product.

Some respondents are of the opinion that UR83 is worth less than other products because it is charged using solar energy while others think that this charging method makes it worth much more

“I think it is cheap because it‘s charged by sunlight” Male, rural, upper LSM

“Yes, it is worth much more because once you buy it, it doesn’t have further expense” Male, rural, upper LSM


US $ 4.5 – 9.1

UR 83



UR 83

The product was not totally new to the respondents interviewed but it was somehow different in shape and in the sense that it used solar energy rather than dry cells

It was perceived to be relevant because of the fact that it has no running costs and gives better light than the lighting devices currently used by the respondents

Overall, UR 83 was well rated in terms of product features such as shape, design, ease of use, control, colour and writing/labeling though some respondents did not like the size. The small size of the bulb was associated with insufficient lighting and the perception was that the bigger the size, the more the light it would provide “I would change the size of the lighting glass to be bigger” Male, urban, lower LSM

Respondents assumed that the battery would not be available in the local market

The likelihood to purchase the product was high because of its unique features and functionality



Product evaluation was different after recall. After testing the product, some of the respondents said that the product was not relevant to them because the light was weak and inadequate. “It is not very relevant because the lighting is very poor. It is not enough” Male, urban, lower LSM

The excitement about the product also dropped amongst those who said that the light was weak and inadequate “I don’t find it exciting, because the amount of light is very low” Female, urban, lower LSM



Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

UR 83



Product uniqueness “It is different because it gets charged in its own way using solar energy that doesn’t cost anything extra” Male, urban, lower LSM

Lighting adequacy “The amount of light of this device is very poor and it was not sufficient enough to light my house” Male, urban, lower LSM

Battery life “I think that it is good and that it lasts longer” Male, rural, upper LSM

Ease of operation “It looks nice but it is too small, however it is very easy to use“ Male, urban, lower LSM

Relevance “It is not very relevant to me. The light was dim” Male, urban, lower LSM

Durability “….but I have a reservation on the plastic cover that it might break if it falls down” Female, rural, upper LSM


UR 83

The product is not new but it is perceived as different because it uses solar energy while the lighting devices currently available in the market use dry cells

The light is not adequate for the lighting needs of some of the respondents, making it irrelevant to their lifestyle



Ratingafter

Comment

Shape Good

Size Good, very small

Design Very attractive, unique

Controls / Ease of handling Convenient, easy to handle

Colours Attractive

Writing/ labeling Attractive


UR 83

Overall evaluation of product features remain positive after product recall with the exception of size which is still considered to be small, resulting in poor lighting


1. Use of solar energy

(no running cost)

2. No smoke

3. Portable

4. Ease of use

5. It is like an electric

lamp

6. Bright light

I like the idea that the batteries are solar charged Rural, upper

LSM

I liked the simplicity of usage and the colour of the design Male,

urban, lower LSM

I liked its mobility. It is easy to carry and move it around Male,

urban, lower LSM

It is better compared to what we normally use Female, urban,

lower LSM

I like the bright light of the product Male, rural, upper LSM

I like its light, it is very strong and very bright Female, rural,

upper LSM


UR 83


1. Weak light

2. Size

3. Switch design

I could use it when I wanted to go outside the house as it is simple to

move or carry but the lighting is very poor Male, urban, lower LSM

The power of light becomes weak very quickly Male, rural, upper

LSM

I dislike the size it is very small Male, rural, upper LSM

The sliding switch might lose its spring in the long run so it is better

to change it to a mechanical method Male, urban, lower LSM


UR 83


Make a protective cover for the solar panel to protect it from unexpected rain

Make longer lasting batteries so that the bright light intensity can last longer

Increase the size of the device to improve the light intensity



UR 83

Most of the respondents perceived this device as easy to use. The respondents were able to use the device both within the household and outside because of its

portability. This was especially relevant to those who need to work at night such as farmers and guards. There were however some respondents who were not

satisfied with the battery life and felt that it was not lasting long enough for their lighting needs.

It is easy to learn how to use it Female, rural, lower LSM It was sufficient for my needs because I could work up to whatever time in the night

Male, rural, higher LSM I used it both inside the house and outdoors whenever I needed to because unlike my

previous lighting device, it is not blown out by the wind

Male, urban, lower LSM I don’t think I am going to use it in my household because it weakens quickly and I need

to charge it again and again. I am not motivated



Likelihood to purchase changed after recall. There were those who would purchase the product because it gave better light than their own lighting device, was solar charged and had no running costs. However, others said that they would not buy it because of its weak light “No, I will never buy it because the light does not stay for a long period. It gets weak quickly” Male, rural, upper LSM

There were those who thought that UR83 was worth more than other products however some respondents thought otherwise because of its weak light “It’s worth less because the amount of light is not enough” Male, Urban, lower LSM

UR 83 Test product evaluation pricing & purchase intent

Feature Before placement After recall






Response Reasons


4.5 – 9.1 Respondents are willing to pay more

Willingness to purchase at the RRP 51.8 “it is very expensive and I can’t afford that” “What I mentioned is my capacity”


Are only willing if financing is considerable

UR83

The product received a better evaluation after use and thus the respondents were willing to pay more than they had previously mentioned

Some of them however mentioned that they could not afford it at the recommended retail price and would only purchase if the financing offered was considerable

HI 65




HI 65


Overall evaluation

Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

HI65 received a positive evaluation in terms of relevance, excitement and clarity. Respondents thought that it was different because they had not seen similar products before that use solar energy “Yes I think so because it is different than the available ones because of the way it is charged. So I think it is different ” Female, urban, lower LSM

The product is seen as relevant because it is perceived to be better than what respondents currently use, has no running costs and is not harmful to their health


none very

HI 65



product

?

Test product associationHI 65

Very innovative

Brightness

Brightness of the light

Seems like an electric lamp when I see it for the first

time.I have never seen this before

Test product association is positive with brightness, innovation and electricity coming to mind when consumers are shown the product. The expectation that the respondents have of the product is ‘bright light’. It also brings about excitement because it is something new to the respondents.


1. It uses solar energy (no

extra costs)

2. It does not produce

smoke

3. Better lighting

4. It is very easy to learn

5. Portable

What I like is that the batteries are solar charged and I can move

or carry the device anywhere I go. So I really like it Male, rural,

upper LSM

…it can give me a very bright light and I can protect my eyes from

smoke Female, rural, upper LSM

Because it is not dangerous for our health Female, urban, lower

LSM

Because my daughter can stay as long as she wants once we

charge it for a day in the sun Male, urban, lower LSM

I like everything, It looks good in shape and colour. I think

everything is fine for me Male, rural, upper LSM

Test product evaluation likesHI 65


1. It is not very bright

2. It is a bit smaller

I would like more power on the light to make it very bright

Female, rural, upper LSM

It is better than any thing I have used previously but I do not say

that it illuminates the room fully, it needs to be more powerful

Urban, lower LSM

…it is a bit small and can be used for one room only Male,

urban, lower LSM


HI 65



Shape Good

Size Convenient, however some respondents do

not like the small size

Design Good, looks like a candle

Controls / ease of use Easy to use and also to handle

Colours Attractive

Writing / labeling Attractive


HI 65

Product features are positively accepted with the exception of size; some respondents think that HI65 is a bit small and does not therefore give adequate light.




Make the light brighter Increase the number of bulbs to

produce more light Add covering glass to distribute the

light better Modify it to power radio and TV

apart from lighting Make it bigger in size Modify it so that it can hang from

the ceiling Replace the plastic cover with a

stronger material





Ease of use

Overall the rating on satisfaction is good, however, respondents complain that the light is weak and gets dim quickly “I would increase the brightness of the light because I want to get a very bright light, more than the kerosene lamp gives” Female, urban, lower LSM

Respondents also think that the battery is not available in the market. They are concerned they may not get a replacement when they need one “I don’t think the batteries will be available as the main device is not available in the market.” Male, rural, upper LSM

HI 65


Overall evaluation




The likelihood to purchase the product is high, but is directly linked to the retail price. “I’ll try to purchase it if it has a fair price.” Male, urban, lower LSM

Most respondents think that HI 65 is worth more than other lighting products in the market simply because it is something new and it is different from what is currently available in the market because it uses solar energy “I think it is worth more …. because once you buy it, it doesn’t have any extra running cost” Male, urban, lower LSM


US $ 2.7 – 4.5

HI 65



HI65 is different from what respondents have seen or used before because of its

charging system which uses solar energy. It is also relevant to them as they

indicate that it gives better light than the devices they are currently using, does not

produce smoke and has no running costs. The light intensity of HI65 received mixed responses; some respondents

considered the light intensity of HI65 better than the light intensity of the devices

they are currently using, others however disliked HI 65 because of its weak light

which was not able to light the whole room. The small size of this product is

thought to be the cause of its poor light intensity. Likelihood to purchase the product is high but depends on whether it will be

affordable. This product is perceived to be worth much more than other lighting products

because it is charged by solar energy, has no running cost and is different from

what respondents use at the moment.

HI 65



Product evaluation slightly changed after recall. The product remained unique and exciting, and respondents understood what to expect from the product. Relevance however dropped because the

light intensity was inadequate for some respondents.

“Yes, it is very different because I have never seen a product like this before and it uses sunlight” Female, rural, upper LSM

“It may not be relevant to me because the light gets weaker and is dim” Male, urban, lower LSM



Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

HI 65


Feature Rating CommentProduct uniqueness “Because it is still not seen in our area and it is so different

from what we currently use” Male, urban, lower LSM

Lighting adequacy “I suggest having more light intensity than the existing light” Female, urban, lower LSM

Battery life “I think it lasts long because it can be charged by solar energy” Male, rural, upper LSM

Ease of operation “It is easy. It didn’t give any difficulties when I operated it” Male, rural, upper LSM

Relevance “It is relevant because it is good to use for children to read and at the same time it can be used for room lighting” Male, urban, lower LSM

Durability “I think it is durable if it is used and kept carefully” Female, rural, upper LSM


HI 65

Respondents were satisfied with the general characteristics of the product except for lighting adequacy; they mentioned that the light was weak and got dim quickly

“It gives me a weak light and it works for a short time” Male, urban, lower LSM



Ratingafter

Comment

Shape Good, interesting

Size Convenient, small,

Design Nice

Controls / Ease of use Easy to handle, no difficulties with controls

Colours Attractive



HI 65

Product features were well evaluated though some respondents did not like the small size as this was associated with inadequate lighting

“I like the shape and it is very easy to use or handle. But if possible I want the size to get bigger” Male, urban, lower LSM


1. Solar charging (no running costs)

2. No air pollution (smoke)

3. Much better light than kerosene lamp / candle

4. Portable

5. Ease of use

6. Good for reading

….it is charged by solar energy and it is portable; it is easy to

move it from place to place Male, rural, upper LSM

It doesn’t have running cost and it can be moved from one place

to another easily Rural, upper LSM

I like the charging system Female, rural, upper LSM

Because everything I see from this product is quite simple in

usage as well as charging without any air pollution Male, urban,

lower LSM

I really like the power of the light. It is good and sufficient. Even

my children were able to read and do their homework Male, rural,

upper LSM

I found this product much better than a kerosene lamp or candle



HI 65


1. It runs out of battery

power quickly

2. Light is not powerful

3. Light is not adequate

No, it didn’t give enough light that is sufficient for my needs.

Female, rural, upper LSM

It has less power of light, in addition to that the light concentrated

and illuminated one place only Male, rural, upper LSM

It gives me a weak light and it works for a short time Male, urban,

lower LSM

The light became dim after sometime Male, rural, upper LSM

I dislike the power of the light, as it is very weak Female, urban,

lower LSM


HI 65


Make the light brighter as it was reported to be dim and therefore not sufficient for their lighting needs

Modify the product so that the light covers a larger area. Respondents said that the light was concentrated in one place thereby illuminating only a limited area of the room

Improve the battery life so that it does not run out of power quickly. Respondents complained that the light became weaker after a short time



Respondents used the product mainly inside the house either by putting it in one place or by moving it around from one point to another within the house

The product was easy to use and to charge and was specifically used for room lighting and for reading. However respondents were of the opinion that it should be used and handled carefully because it looked like it could be damaged easily.

While some respondents felt that this is a product for someone like them because it has no running costs others said that they would not use the product due to its weak light

HI 65

I can use the device by moving it from one place to the other in times of darkness. Male, rural, upper LSM Yes, it is useful for me and reduces my expenses. It will be the same for someone like me. Female, urban, lower LSM No, because if I do not want to use it, I will not say that this product is good for someone like me. Female, urban, lower LSM We put the device on the table and my children were able to study Male, rural, upper LSM


Although the product was still seen as relevant and better than their own lighting devices, the likelihood to purchase dropped after recall because of the low light intensity and the price.

“Not very likely, because it could not give us enough light in our home” Female, urban, lower LSM

Others thought that because of the weak light, it was worth less than other products.

“It has poor lighting so I think it is worth much less” Male, rural, upper LSM


Feature Before Placement After Placement



HI 65




Response Reasons


2.7 – 4.5 Respondents are not willing to pay more for this product because of its weak light

Willingness to purchase at the RRP 21.8 Some are not willing because they feel that it is expensive yet it did not meet their lighting needs


Are not willing as it is still considered too expensive considering its weak light

Willingness to purchase without solar panel (KO13/ HI65 only )

10.9 Are not willing as they have no access to electricity for recharging

Willingness to purchase solar panel separately Respondents are interested if it makes the product more affordable for them this way

Purchase price (without solar panel) with monthly AC running cost

13.2 Not willing to incur monthly costs

HI 65

Some respondents are not willing to pay more than they had mentioned before placement because the light of the product is weak and not sufficient for their lighting needs

Others are willing to buy it at the recommended retail price because it does not incur any running costs

RY 04




RY 04


Overall evaluation

Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

RY04 is not seen as unique because similar products already exist in the market“The office gave a similar device to my husband and it is also available in the

market. It is not that new” Female, urban, lower LSM

The portability of the product make it very relevant to the lifestyle of respondents because they do most of their activities at home in the evening and at night and they can carry RY04 around

easily “Actually it is relevant for my lifestyle because our life is mostly outside our home. For example we control cattle at night around the barn.” Male, rural, upper LSM


none very

RY 04



product

?

Test product associationRY 04

Better light wherever

I go

I think it is very convenient and easy to use and also I believe it

gives a better light.

It is the same as torches

that are available in the

market currently

The product is mainly associated with better lighting, convenience, ease of use and similar

products already available in the market. However, RY04 is perceived as being better than the products

currently available. It is also associated with portability because one can carry it wherever he/she goes.

It is better than a

similar product I know


1. Portable

2. Powerful light

3. Shape

…I can use it everywhere I want to because it can be moved

easily. I can use it to see everything inside and outside my

house. Urban, lower LSM

I like it because it gives me light when I go out for different

purposes. Rural, upper LSM

It is easy to use and also to move it from place to place Female,

urban, lower LSM

Because even now in day light, the amount of light is powerful.

So you can imagine how it would be at night Female, urban,

lower LSM

It is very light in weight Male, rural, upper LSM

Test product evaluation likesRY 04


1. Charging system

2. Inadequate light for the

whole house

It is a bit difficult to go to town to charge the batteries Female

rural, upper LSM

I dislike the way we charge the product. it doesn’t work without

electric charge Male, rural, upper LSM

It only gives light where the device is located, it doesn’t light

the whole room Rural, upper LSM

It works by using electric charge which we do not have today

and it is very difficult to charge the battery in another place



RY 04


Feature Overall rating

Comment

Shape Good, convenient shape, good for handling

Size It is not too big or too small, it is convenient

Design Good

Controls / Ease of use Easy to use

Colours Attractive



RY 04

Evaluation of the product features was positive. The product was seen as convenient in shape and size and also easy to use.



Suggestions for improvement

Summary of satisfaction rating

The product should have two charging signals: The blinking green signal when battery is low and a red light when the battery is fully charged

Solar charging option to make it convenient for those away from electricity



Uniqueness- already in the market


Ease of use

Suggestions for improvement are related to the charging system of the product. As much as the product is considered relevant and useful, charging by electricity is an issue because most respondents do not have electricity at home and some of them have to go far to charge it. “I would change its charging system from electricity to solar energy so that I don’t have to go to town to charge this lighting device” Female, rural, upper LSM

As respondents live far away from places that are connected to the electricity grid, charging signals to indicate the status of the battery are suggested for improvement of RY04 “It would help me if it had a charging signal, since we are living away from the places where electricity is available we need to know what the status of the charge is” Male, rural, upper LSM

RY 04


Overall evaluation




The likelihood to purchase the product is very low, mainly because of the charging system. Respondents do not have electricity and for some charging the product means traveling to town which is sometimes very far.

“No, I would not buy it. Because I don’t like its charging system, I have to go to town for charging” Male, rural, upper LSM

“I would buy it if it would work by solar energy“ Male, urban, lower LSM

“I don’t think I’m going to buy it. Because I think it is exhausting to go to town just to get it charged” Female, rural, upper LSM

Respondents think that the product is worth much more than other products because of its quality and because it is rechargeable “It worth much more because the material is of higher quality than what is currently available” Male, urban, lower LSM

“Yes worth much more. Because it is a rechargeable torch” Male, rural, upper LSM


US $ 1.4 – 2.3

RY 04



RY04 is not perceived as unique as similar products already exist in the market and have been used by some of the respondents

The feature that makes this product relevant to the lifestyle of respondents is portability since respondents are able to carry it around and use it outside at night “For someone like me? Yes, because most of our people have a lot of work outside their house at night” Female, urban, lower LSM

It is perceived as very convenient because of its shape which makes handling easy

The bright light causes a lot of excitement as the light intensity of RY04 cannot be compared to that of any other lighting device respondents have used before

The charging system is a big challenge to respondents because they do not have electricity at home which means they have to travel (e.g. to town) to charge the product. This challenge considerably lowers the likelihood to purchase the product

RY 04



Evaluation of product uniqueness changed after recall. Before product placement respondents thought that the product was the same as what they had seen before but after recall they found out that the product was different in terms of lighting and the charging system.“It is a little different because it gives a very good light, better than the available ones and it works by electricity charge” Female, urban, lower LSM

RY04 was perceived as very relevant to the lifestyle of respondents because of the fact that it is portable and thus can be used outside at night“It is relevant because it is very easy to carry around when you want to go out of the house at night” Male, rural, upper LSM“It is very relevant. Because I was able to feed the horses and the cattle at night by carrying it around” Female, urban, lower LSM



Uniqueness

Relevance

Excitement

Clarity

RY 04



Product uniqueness

“Yes I have seen a similar ones but the system is a bit different” Male,

urban, lower LSM

Lighting adequacy“The amount of light was enough for me to do things in the house. It was good “ Male, urban, lower LSM

Battery life“It lasts longer but I think that once the batteries are weak after a lot of usage you cannot substitute the battery even if it is available”Female, urban, lower LSM

Ease of operation“In terms of handling, it is very easy to use so everything is great” Male, rural, upper LSM

Relevance“It is very relevant. Because I was able to feed the horses and the cattle at night by carrying it around” Female, urban, lower LSM

Durability“It can be durable if we use it carefully. Because it looks like a strong device” Male, rural, upper LSM


RY 04

Evaluation of the general characteristics of the product was positive after recall. The rating on uniqueness was lower; the product was not considered new but different from what respondents had seen before because of its powerful light and charging system. “It is not new but different because I know the device at the neighbour’s house which power of lighting is so different” Female, rural, upper LSM



Ratingafter

Comment

Shape Good

Size Good

Design Good for handling, easy to carry around

Handling/ Controls Very easy to use, no difficulties

Colours Good



RY 04

Respondents are positive about the features of the product. The design, size and ease of use make RY04 very relevant to the lifestyle of the respondents.


1. Portable

2. No problems to health

(No smoke)

3. Adequate light

4. It is easy to use

5. Does not cost much to

charge

I like everything. I like the thing that it gives a good amount of light

and the battery lasts a long time. So it’s good Male, rural, upper

LSM

It does not affect my health Male, rural, upper LSM

Because it costs less to charge Male, urban, lower LSM

It is easy to carry around Male, rural, upper LSM

I like it because it is easy to use and also to move it from place to

place Female, urban, lower LSM

Because it gives a better light, powerful light Male, rural, upper LSM

I like it because it doesn’t produce smoke Male, rural, upper LSM


RY 04


1. Charging system

2. Running cost

3. Lights in one direction/lights only a small area

The monthly running cost is very expensive. The running cost

should be less or even zero if possible. Female, urban, lower LSM

I don’t want to go to distant places where electricity is available to

charge the device Male, rural, upper LSM

The light does not cover a large area Female, urban, lower LSM

It is exhausting to go to town just to get it charged Male, rural,

upper LSM

It gives light only in one direction Female, rural, upper LSM


RY 04


Change the charging system from electricity to solar because most consumers do not have access to

electricity and some have to go far (e.g. to town) to charge their torch.



Respondents mainly used this product outside their houses such as when they visited neighbours or controlled livestock in the evening. They even used it when they had to feed the livestock at night because RY04 was found easy to carry around when doing such activities

They also used it to locate items because it had a bright light and could easily be carried around when they were looking for something

Most respondents agreed that the product was for someone like them because their lifestyle involves moving from one place to another and they carry out various activities outside their houses in the evening/at night

They did not experience any difficulties in using the product and the overall opinion was that the product was easy to use. However charging it was seen as a difficult task because respondents do not have access to electricity and they have to travel to charge the battery

RY 04

I cannot move outside with a kerosene lamp as the light gets blown out by the wind

Male, rural, upper LSMYes, because most of our people have a lot of work outside their house at night Female, urban, lower LSMBecause it is easily moved from place to place and it gives a bright light. We can easily use it to see anything outside the house Male, rural, upper LSM


Likelihood to purchase remains low after recall because of the charging system, as it involves going to a place where electricity is available (town). “No, I don’t want to buy it because it is a lot of work to charge the batteries but if I didn’t have any other choice, I would buy it “ Female, rural, upper LSM

Some respondents are also not willing to buy the product because of the running cost involved which makes it expensive “No. I still don’t want to buy it. The monthly running cost is very expensive” Male, urban, lower LSM

After recall, respondents still perceived RY04 to be worth much more than other products because of its bright light and unique charging system


Feature Before placement After recall



RY 04




Response Reasons


1.4 – 2.3 “If I can afford it, I won’t hesitate to pay more

because I believe this device has better quality

than the available ones” Male, urban, lower LSM

“It is expensive if it is more than that (30 ETB/US $ 2.73)” Female, urban, lower LSM

Willingness to purchase at the RRP 4.2 “I cannot afford it, it is a bit more expensive than I expected” Male, rural, upper LSM


They are only interested if the RRP is brought down first

RY 04

They are willing to pay more than the perceived price because it offers better quality light than similar existing products

They are however not willing to purchase it at the recommended retail price as it is perceived to be too expensive considering that it is charged using electricity and therefore has monthly running costs

SUMMARY OF PRODUCT EVALUATION


Insights

Charging products using electricity is a challenge. Apart from incurring running costs on charging the device, accessing electricity in Ethiopia is generally difficult as it often involves traveling to reach a place that is connected to the electricity grid.

Using solar energy would be a challenge in Ethiopia during the rainy season (June-September) because of lack of sunlight.

In Ethiopia many people use home made lighting devices. These devices are made from modifications on bulbs which are then connected to dry cells and fixed on walls and roofs just like electric bulbs.

Portability of lighting products is key for both inside and outside lighting. The Ethiopian consumers have a lot of activities outside their houses in the evening/at night such as feeding horses, controlling livestock and visiting neighbours and therefore they prefer a lighting product that they can carry around easily. Inside the house, portability is important as well because consumers need to move the product from one room to another or from place to place if it cannot light the whole room.

Smoke free lighting is important to the Ethiopian consumer because smoke is seen as a cause of health problems and irritation to the eyes.

Light intensity of the test products was compared to the light intensity of lighting devices currently used. Certain lighting products were rated highly by respondents who currently use poor lighting devices such as candles and tin lamps while at the same time they were rated poorly by those who use torch bulbs connected to dry cells.

Cost is significant to the Ethiopian consumer; the likelihood to purchase the test products depends on their prices and affordability. Solar charged products were preferred because they do not have running costs.


Products Tested TM41 RY04 HI 65 UR83 KO13

Average hours product is used during test period (5 days)

3 – 5 hrs 2 hrs 3 – 4 hrs 3 – 4 hrs 3 – 4 hrs

Average hours product is used before subsequent recharge

8 – 9 hrs 4 hrs 8 hrs 8 – 9 hrs 8 – 10 hrs

Average hours product is recharged daily

1 – 3 hrs 2 – 3 hrs 1 – 3 hrs 2 – 3 hrs 2 – 4 hrs

General description of weather during recharge of test product

Mostly Clear

Occasionally Clear

Heavy cloud cover

Test productaverage lighting hours


Summary average lighting hours

Except for RY04, all products were used for a similar amount of time (3 – 5

hrs). In addition, the average number of hours before the product was

recharged was more or less the same. This shows that the usage and

recharging habits were not dependent on the actual battery life of the

product but on the usage habits and patterns of the respondents

RY04 was mainly used as a supplementary device as it was used for very

few hours by the respondents and was never recharged by most of them


Test product overall evaluation

TM41

This product was generally well evaluated both before and after usage because of its

quality of light and design. TM41 was very relevant to the respondents as it met their lighting

needs because of the bright light and the ability to light two different rooms simultaneously.

The product was also perceived as good for their health because it does not emit smoke. It

was also considered cost-effective as it does not incur any running costs.

Even though the purchase intent was high before product placement, the product was

perceived as too expensive for most of the respondents



RY 04

After product test, respondents thought that although RY04 was not new to them, it was somehow different from what they had seen and used before because of the powerful light and charging system.

The product remained very relevant after recall because respondents were able to carry it around as they did their activities outside the house such as feeding and controlling livestock and also to light the way when they visited neighbours in the evening.

The product was liked because of its adequate and powerful light, ease of use and portability. The fact that it is smoke free and therefore not a source of health problems made it appealing as well.

This product was disliked because of its charging system which leads to running costs and involves going to distant places where there is electricity. It also lights in only one direction.

Likelihood to purchase remained low after recall mainly because of the charging system.



HI 65

HI 65 was evaluated as different, relevant and exciting because it is charged by solar energy. However respondents did not think that it was a new idea because they currently use similar products that use dry cells.

Its features were positively evaluated, however some respondents thoughtthat the size was a bit small and would prefer a bigger size. The product was poorly evaluated in terms of light adequacy. This is because the light was not powerful and got weaker quickly.

Overall, durability of the product was considered to be dependent on how it would be handled, i.e. with careful handling and usage, it was perceived to be durable “I think if I keep it properly it is durable….” Male, rural, upper LSM

Likelihood to purchase was lower after product test because of the weak light which also made respondents think that it was worth much less than other Products.

Charging during rainy season was seen as a potential problem because in that season there is no sunlight “I may buy it but as it uses solar energy, I am worried that it might not work in Kiremt season. I don’t know” Male, rural, upper LSM



UR 83

Though the product was evaluated as different after product test because it uses solar energy, the relevance and excitement dropped because some respondents found the light to weak and inadequate

Respondents seemed to measure the adequacy of the light by comparing it with the light intensity of their own lighting device. Those who used kerosene lamps and candles found the light good and bright but those who used home made devices e.g. light bulb connected to dry cells found the lightweak and inadequate and preferred the device they currently use despite the running cost “Mine is better. I found it poor in terms of quality of light” Male, urban, lower LSM (Currently using a light bulb connected to dry cells)

The small size of the bulb was perceived as the cause of poor lighting and the suggestion was that it should be made bigger

Likelihood to purchase dropped after product test because of its weak light which also made some respondents say that it was worth much less than other products



KO 13

The outstanding features of the product such as charging system (solar), smoke free, bright light and ability to light two rooms at the same time made KO13 different from any other lighting device respondents had seen before.

After product test, there were a few respondents who thought that KO13 was not relevant to them because they could not carry it around from place to place and because the light became weaker quickly.

Although solar charging was one of the features that made the product appealing to respondents, it caused worries about the rainy season (kiremt) when there is no sunlight and therefore the battery may not charge at all in that period.

Willingness to buy the product remained high after product test, however it is important to note that the likelihood to purchase depended on affordability. After product test, there were respondents who were no longer willing to buy it because of the light that got weaker after some time and because they could not carry it from place to place

RECOMMENDATIONS


General product preference overview

Amongst all the respondents that were interviewed, the following were the most preferred lighting devices:

– TM 41: The main drivers were the brightness of the light, the solar charging aspect and the portability which allowed them to illuminate two rooms at the same time

– KO 13: The main drivers were the brightness of the light, the AC and solar charging options and the ability to light two rooms simultaneously

Amongst all the respondents that were interviewed, the following were the least preferred lighting devices:

– UR 83: The main barriers were the weak light and the size

– RY 04: The main barrier was the electric charging system as they have no access to electricity. The light was also perceived as inadequate for all the lighting needs

– HI 65: The main driver was the weak light which was inadequate for the lighting needs of the respondents

TM 41 KO 13 UR 83 RY 04 HI 65

Decreasing preference


The most preferred product wasTM41.

Reasons for preference are:

• The brightness of the light

• The light covers a wider area

• Solar charging therefore no running costs

• It can light two rooms at the same time

• It is portable making it flexible in usage

• It can be used to power the radio

• The battery life is longer than the battery life of other products

TM 41

Product with the highest preference


Product with the lowest preference

HI65 was the least preferred product. The reasons being:

• The light is dim and cannot light a whole room

• It is small in size and this is perceived to contribute to the dimness of light

• It runs out of battery power quickly

• The light has a small coverage area

HI 65


Barriers to use of preferred product

The main barrier to usage of the most preferred product was the financial capacity of respondents. The TM41 was perceived to be too expensive and most of the respondents were not willing to purchase it even with financial assistance to offset part of the purchasing cost.

There were concerns regarding the solarpanel; they may not work during the rainy season (Kiremt) from June to September, and they may not be available in the market.

The ease of handling did not receive a very good rating; the hook that was used to hang the device was perceived to be weak. Some respondents considered the device fragile and felt they had to take extra care in handling this device, thus it was not so easy to use.


Motivations to use of preferred product

The main motivations to usage of TM 41 was the fact that this product met the two most important needs of consumers in Ethiopia:

– no health risk (no smoke)

– no running costs

In addition, they liked the brightness of this product as well as its convenient design

The consumers interviewed were impressed by the quality of the light and its portability and therefore they were willing to pay more than they had initially mentioned

It is very easy to use, affordable (no running cost), the kids can study, and it has no effect on your health, so it is good for me Female, urban, lower LSM


Currency Conversion Rate

Ethiopia

USD 1 = ETB 11 *Approximate, as of May 2009


Documents

LIGHTING DEVICES TEST RESULTS Ethiopia Results June 2009