5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The Impact of Pro-Poor Sanitation Subsidies in Open Defecation-Free Communities: A Randomized, Controlled Trial in Rural Ghana

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background:

          According to the World Health Organization/United Nations International Children’s Fund Joint Monitoring Program, 494  million people practice open defecation globally. After achieving open defecation-free (ODF) status through efforts such as Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS), communities (particularly vulnerable households) may revert to open defecation, especially when toilet collapse is common and durable toilets are unaffordable. Accordingly, there is increasing interest in pro-poor sanitation subsidies.

          Objectives:

          This study determined the impacts of a pro-poor sanitation subsidy program on sanitation conditions among the most vulnerable households and others in the community.

          Methods:

          In 109 post-ODF communities in Northern Ghana, we conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial to evaluate a pro-poor subsidy program that identified the most vulnerable households through community consultation to receive vouchers for durable toilet substructures. We surveyed households to assess toilet coverage, quality, and use before and after the intervention and tracked program costs.

          Results:

          Overall, sanitation conditions deteriorated substantially from baseline to endline (average of 21 months). In control communities (not receiving the pro-poor subsidy), open defecation increased from 25% (baseline) to 69% (endline). The subsidy intervention attenuated this deterioration (open defecation increased from 25% to only 54% in subsidy communities), with the greatest impacts among voucher-eligible households. Noneligible households in compounds with subsidized toilets also exhibited lower open defecation levels owing to in-compound sharing (common in this context). CLTS followed by the subsidy program would benefit more households than CLTS alone but would cost 21–37% more per household that no longer practiced open defecation or upgraded to a durable toilet.

          Discussion:

          Sanitation declines, often due to toilet collapse, suggest a need for approaches beyond CLTS alone. This subsidy program attenuated declines, but durable toilets likely remained unaffordable for noneligible households. Targeting criteria more closely aligned with sanitation inequities, such as household heads who are female or did not complete primary education, may help to generate greater and more sustainable impacts in Northern Ghana and, potentially, other contexts facing toilet collapse and limited market access. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP10443

          Related collections

          Most cited references53

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Scientists rise up against statistical significance

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Sanitation subsidies. Encouraging sanitation investment in the developing world: a cluster-randomized trial.

            Poor sanitation contributes to morbidity and mortality in the developing world, but there is disagreement on what policies can increase sanitation coverage. To measure the effects of alternative policies on investment in hygienic latrines, we assigned 380 communities in rural Bangladesh to different marketing treatments-community motivation and information; subsidies; a supply-side market access intervention; and a control-in a cluster-randomized trial. Community motivation alone did not increase hygienic latrine ownership (+1.6 percentage points, P = 0.43), nor did the supply-side intervention (+0.3 percentage points, P = 0.90). Subsidies to the majority of the landless poor increased ownership among subsidized households (+22.0 percentage points, P < 0.001) and their unsubsidized neighbors (+8.5 percentage points, P = 0.001), which suggests that investment decisions are interlinked across neighbors. Subsidies also reduced open defecation by 14 percentage points (P < 0.001).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Sustainability of community-led total sanitation outcomes: Evidence from Ethiopia and Ghana

              We conducted a study to evaluate the sustainability of community-led total sanitation (CLTS) outcomes in Ethiopia and Ghana. Plan International, with local actors, implemented four CLTS interventions from 2012 to 2014: health extension worker-facilitated CLTS and teacher-facilitated CLTS in Ethiopia, and NGO-facilitated CLTS with and without training for natural leaders in Ghana. We previously evaluated these interventions using survey data collected immediately after implementation ended, and concluded that in Ethiopia health extension workers were more effective facilitators than teachers, and that in Ghana training natural leaders improved CLTS outcomes. For this study, we resurveyed 3831 households one year after implementation ended, and analyzed latrine use and quality to assess post-intervention changes in sanitation outcomes, to determine if our original conclusions were robust. In one of four interventions evaluated (health extension worker-facilitated CLTS in Ethiopia), there was an 8 percentage point increase in open defecation in the year after implementation ended, challenging our prior conclusion on their effectiveness. For the other three interventions, the initial decreases in open defecation of 8–24 percentage points were sustained, with no significant changes occurring in the year after implementation. On average, latrines in Ethiopia were lower quality than those in Ghana. In the year following implementation, forty-five percent of households in Ethiopia repaired or rebuilt latrines that had become unusable, while only 6% did in Ghana possibly due to higher latrine quality. Across all four interventions and three survey rounds, most latrines remained unimproved. Regardless of the intervention, households in villages higher latrine use were more likely to have sustained latrine use, which together with the high latrine repair rates indicates a potential social norm. There are few studies that revisit villages after an initial evaluation to assess sustainability of sanitation outcomes. This study provides new evidence that CLTS outcomes can be sustained in the presence of training provided to local actors, and strengthens previous recommendations that CLTS is not appropriate in all settings and should be combined with efforts to address barriers households face to building higher quality latrines.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Environ Health Perspect
                Environ Health Perspect
                EHP
                Environmental Health Perspectives
                Environmental Health Perspectives
                0091-6765
                1552-9924
                8 June 2022
                June 2022
                : 130
                : 6
                : 067004
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]Aquaya Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
                [ 2 ]Aquaya Institute, San Anselmo, California, USA
                [ 3 ]University of Energy and Natural Resources , Sunyani, Ghana
                [ 4 ]NHance Development Partners Ltd ., Kumasi, Ghana
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to John T. Trimmer, P.O. Box 21862-00505, Nairobi, Kenya. Email: john.t@ 123456aquaya.org
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4809-6684
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9256-0800
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4454-868X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2474-1191
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8359-6847
                Article
                EHP10443
                10.1289/EHP10443
                9176208
                35674667
                9447f6d3-bd27-477a-a819-fd5849c7e1a3

                EHP is an open-access journal published with support from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health. All content is public domain unless otherwise noted.

                History
                : 06 October 2021
                : 26 April 2022
                : 09 May 2022
                Categories
                Research

                Public health
                Public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article