WSP Long-term Sustainability of Sanitation in Rural Bangladesh study bbb july 21 2010
-
Upload
world-bank-water-and-sanitation-program -
Category
Education
-
view
1.459 -
download
4
description
Transcript of WSP Long-term Sustainability of Sanitation in Rural Bangladesh study bbb july 21 2010
Long-term Sustainability of Rural SanitationFindings from a Study in Bangladesh
Craig Kullmann
1
Overview of Session
oStudy Objectives
o Background
o Methodology
o Findings – Sanitation Status| Durability of Latrines
o Findings - Sustainability Factors - Positive | Negative
o Conclusions
o Program Considerations
2
Study Objectives
3
1. Understand current status of sanitation behaviors and durability of latrines
2. Why households have or have not sustained behaviors and their latrines.
3. Has sanitation programming been sustained and has it helped sustain behaviors and latrines?
4. Have private sector sanitation providers helped sustain behaviors and latrines?
4
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 20080%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Access to hygienic sanitation*
Open defe-cation**%
Hou
seho
ld c
over
age
*Source: Bangladesh National Secretariat – 2008
**Source: JMP 2010 Update
Rural Sanitation Coverage Has Increased and Open Defecation is Declining Nationwide
Background
Methodology
5
• 480 Open Defecation Free Local Gov’t (LG) as of 2005
• Sampled 50 Local Gov’t (10% of pool)
• 3,000 household survey
• 18 Local Gov’t with in-depth Qualitative
6
• By Collective Outcomes• By Wealth Quintiles
Study Objective 1a: What is the Current Status of Sanitation Behaviors?
7
68%
28%
4%
Household Sanitation Access and Use Across Local Governments is Relatively High (n=50
LGs)
HIGH ACCESS (90-100% HH)
MODERATELY HIGH ACCESS (70-89% HH)
LOW ACCESS (<50% HH)
HIGH ACCESS (90-100% HH)
MODERATELY HIGH ACCESS (70-89% HH)
LOW ACCESS (<50% HH)
HH access based on 3,000 HH survey
Study Objective 1a –What is the Current Status of Sanitation Behaviors?
8
Confining Feces
OD
89%
11%
Majority of Households Own or Share an Improved Type of Latrine (n=3,000)
% HH practicing safe sanitation
% HH not practicing safe sanitation (OD/Unimproved Latrine)
Study Objective 1a –What is the Current Status of Sanitation Behaviors?
9
Over 80% of the poorest households own or share an improved latrine (n=3,000)
Poorest 2nd 3rd 4th Richest0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Improved/Shared
Unimproved/Open Defecation
Wealth Quintile
% S
anita
tion
Cove
rage
Study Objective 1a –What is the Current Status of Sanitation Behaviors?
10
Study Objective 1b: What is the Durability of Latrines?
11
Study Objective 1b– What is the Durability of Latrines?
69%
31%
Based on Duration of Ownership Latrines are Durable (n=2,487)
> 3yrs
< 3 yrs
12
94%
1%5%
Most Latrines Have a Durable Type of Slab Such as Concrete (n=2,686)
Concrete Slab
Wood Slab
Earthen Slab
Study Objective 1b– What is the Durability of Latrines?
13
Exploring Factors Supporting Sustained Outcomes
Study Objective 3: Has sanitation programming been sustained and has it helped sustain behaviors and facilities?
Study Objective 2: Why have households sustained behaviors and their latrines?
Study Objective 4: Have private sector sanitation providers helped sustain behaviors and latrines?
14
Social Norms Positively Reinforce Latrine Use
“The sanitation revolution and the 1971 independence revolution had the same character.” Local Gov’t Chairman
“All spots in the village are free of open defecation. Hanging latrines no longer pollute the waterways and people understand that open defecation is a type of social negligence.” Focus Group Discussant
Study Objectives 2: Why have households sustained behaviors and their latrines?
15
Sanitation Programming has been Sustained and Appears to Help Sustain Latrine Use (n=50)
1/3 Very Active
LG
1/3 Moderately Active LG
1/3 Inactive
LG
Reminding constituents
Use ADP funds for sanitation
Declaring rules against open defecation
Providing latrine parts to poor families
Study Objectives 3 - Has sanitation programming been sustained and has it helped sustain behaviors and facilities?
16
High Access to Parts Suppliers/Masons
95%
5% No Access
Access figures are self-reported based on household survey
n=2,487 Access
Access
Study Objectives 4- Have private sector sanitation providers helped sustain behaviors and latrines?
17
Access
Access figures are self-reported based on household survey
74%
26%
n=2,686Access
Access
No Access
High Access to Pit Emptying Services
Study Objectives 4- Have private sector sanitation providers helped sustain behaviors and latrines?
18
Exploring Factors Working Against Sustained Outcomes
Study Objective 3: Does lack of sanitation programming effect sustain behaviors and facilities?
Study Objective 2: Why have households not sustained behaviors and their latrines?
Study Objective 4: Have private sector sanitation providers helped sustain behaviors and latrines?
19
Natural Disasters
Study Objectives 2 - Why have households not sustained behaviors and their latrines?
20
Lack of Sanitation Programming May Affect Sustained Latrine Use
Improved
Un-improved
•8 out of 50 Local Governments had >20% of households with unimproved latrines/open defecation
•None had an active Local Government Chairman
•5 of the 8 had no follow up sanitation program
Study Objectives 3 - Does lack of sanitation programming effect sustain behaviors and facilities?
21
• 63% of households indicated lack of money
Lack of Access to Cash/Credit
No access to loan68%
Access to a loan16%
Don't Know16%
Knowledge of Where to Get a Loan for a Latrine
(n=2,686)
Study Objectives 4- Have private sector sanitation providers helped sustain behaviors and latrines?
22
Enabling Environment
Social Norms
Active Private Sector
Sanitation Programming
Sustained Behaviors
Conclusion About Sustaining Latrine Use
23
Program Considerations – Inside of Bangladesh
Application of Sanitation Marketing
• Households that still don’t have basic access
• Strengthen private sector to offer affordable range of products and services
24
Program Considerations – Outside of Bangladesh
Focus on the Enabling
Environment
For More Information on …
• Sharing• Cleanliness• Satisfaction Levels• Perceived Benefits• Additional Analysis
www.wsp.org/scalingupsanitation
Chronicles of CLTS in Bangladesh view at www.bitly.com
Study TeamDr. Laurie Krieger – The Manoff Group (Project Director)
Dr. Suzanne Hanchett – Planning Alternatives for Change Consulting (Team Leader)
Mohid Khan – Pathway Consulting Services (Deputy Team Leader)
Craig Kullmann – Task Manager – WSP Rokeya Ahmed – WSP-Bangladesh
Santanu Lahiri, Abdul Motaleb, Mark Ellery, Mansoor Kabeer - WSP Colleagues in Bangladesh
Eddy Perez, Jacqueline Devine, Nila Mukherjee, Soma Gosh, and Pete Kolsky, Amy Grossman- WSP and World Bank Colleagues in Washington DC
Government of Bangladesh
Development Partners in Bangladesh