There are a variety of technologies that can help alleviate the energy poverty facing nearly 40% of the world's population today. Yet the most effective among a variety of options is often not clear due to the range of outcomes desired by various stakeholders, constraints imposed by the local conditions and needs, and factors dictating the application and use of these devices. To better understand and anticipate the differences between potential strategies, this article uses a multi-objective probabilistic system model previously developed by the authors to compare the baseline situation in a well-characterized village in Mali to six common single technologies including improved, advanced, communal, and LPG cookstoves; and solar water heating and lighting systems. An integrated strategy was also investigated. Outcomes in terms of energy access and use, health and climate impacts, economic costs and benefits, and quality of life were compared. Results showed that no single technology could optimally address all objectives simultaneously, and that objectives were often conflicting. An integrated approach that seeks to build upon the natural user tendencies to "stack" the fuels and devices that are most convenient and affordable for each task was found to produce the most significant impacts in all areas. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.