Suchergebnisse

This study examined drivers and barriers of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) policies in urban informal settlements in low and middle-income countries. We conducted a search of peer-reviewed and grey literature published between January 2000 and April 2018. We organized evidence into six domains of drivers and barriers: economic, spatial, social, institutional, political, and informational. Key drivers included donor prioritization and collective action, while key barriers included social exclusion, lack of land or dwelling tenure status, the political economy of decision-making, and insufficient data. Ensuring responsive water and sanitation policies for informal settlements will require inter-disciplinary collaboration and both top-down and bottom-up approaches.

BACKGROUND: While women and girls face special risks from lack of access to sanitation facilities, their ability to participate and influence household-level sanitation is not well understood. This paper examines the association between women's decision-making autonomy and latrine construction in rural areas of Odisha, India. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-method study among rural households in Puri district. This included a cross sectional survey among 475 randomly selected households. These were classified as either having a functional latrine, a non-functional latrine or no latrine at all. We also conducted 17 in-depth interviews and 9 focus group discussions among household members of these three categories of households. RESULTS: Decisions on the construction of household level sanitation facilities were made exclusively by the male head in 80% of households; in 11% the decision was made by men who consulted or otherwise involved women. In only 9% of households the decision was made by women. Households where women were more involved in general decision making processes were no more likely to build a latrine, compared to households where they were excluded from decisions. Qualitative research revealed that women's non-involvement in sanitation decision making is attributed to their low socio-economic status and inability to influence the household's financial decisions. Female heads lacked confidence to take decisions independently, and were dependent on their spouse or other male family members for most decisions. The study revealed the existence of power hierarchies and dynamics within households, which constrained female's participation in decision-making processes regarding sanitation. CONCLUSIONS: Though governments and implementers emphasize women's involvement in sanitation programmes, socio-cultural factors and community and household level dynamics often prevent women from participating in sanitation-related decisions. Measures are needed for strengthening sanitation policies and effective implementation of programmes to address gender power relations and familial relationships that influence latrine adoption and use.

Abstract Background Open defecation is widely practiced in India. To improve sanitation and promote better health, the Government of India (GOI) has instituted large scale sanitation programmes supporting construction of public and institutional toilets and extending financial subsidies for poor families in rural areas for building individual household latrines. Nevertheless, many household latrines in rural India, built with government subsidies and the facilitation and support of non-government organizations (NGO), remain unused. Literature on social, cultural and behavioural aspects that constrain latrine adoption and use in rural India is limited. This paper examines defecation patterns of different groups of people in rural areas of Odisha state in India to identify causes and determinants of latrine non-use, with a special focus on government-subsidized latrine owners, and shortcomings in household sanitation infrastructure built with government subsidies. Methods An exploratory study using qualitative methods was conducted in rural communities in Odisha state. Methods used were focus group discussions (FGDs), and observations of latrines and interviews with their owners. FGDs were held with frontline NGO sanitation program staff, and with community members, separately by caste, gender, latrine type, and age group. Data were analysed using a thematic framework and approach. Results Government subsidized latrines were mostly found unfinished. Many counted as complete per government standards for disbursement of financial subsidies to contracted NGOs were not accepted by their owners and termed as 'incomplete'. These latrines lacked a roof, door, adequate walls and any provision for water supply in or near the cabin, whereas rural people had elaborate processes of cleansing with water post defecation, making presence of a nearby water source important. Habits, socialising, sanitation rituals and daily routines varying with caste, gender, marital status, age and lifestyle, also hindered the adoption of latrines. Interest in constructing latrines was observed among male heads for their female members especially a newlywed daughter-in-law, reflecting concerns for their privacy, security, and convenience. This paper elaborates on these different factors. Conclusions Findings show that providing infrastructure does not ensure use when there are significant and culturally engrained behavioural barriers to using latrines. Future sanitation programmes in rural India need to focus on understanding and addressing these behavioural barriers.

BACKGROUND: Despite efforts to eradicate it, open defecation remains widely practiced in India, especially in rural areas. Between 2013 and 2014, 50 villages in one district of Odisha, India, received a sanitation programme under the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA - "Clean India Campaign"), the successor of India's Total Sanitation Campaign. This paper documents the strategies and processes of NBA community mobilisation for latrine promotion in these villages and assesses the strengths and limitations of the mobilisation activities. METHODS: NBA's community mobilisation activities were observed and assessed against the programme's theory of change in 10 randomly selected programme villages from start to finish. Additional data was collected through review of documents, individual interviews (n = 80) and focus group discussions (n = 26) with staff of the implementing NGOs and community members. RESULTS: Our study revealed the lack of a consistent implementation strategy, lack of capacities and facilitation skills of NGO staff to implement sanitation programmes, political interference, challenges in accessing government financial incentives for latrine construction, and lack of clarity on the roles and responsibilities among government and NGO staff, leading to failure in translating government policies into sustainable actions. Social divisions and village dynamics related to gender and caste further constrained the effectiveness of mobilisation activities. Meetings were often dominated by male members of upper caste households, and excluded low caste community members and views of women. Community discussions revolved largely around the government's cash incentive for latrines. Activities aimed at creating demand for sanitation and use of latrines often resonated poorly with community members. An assessment by the implementers, 1 year after community mobilisation found 19% of households had a completed latrine across the 50 villages, a marginal increase of 7 percentage points over baseline. CONCLUSIONS: In this setting, the Government of India's NBA programme to increase rural sanitation coverage and use is hampered by political, programmatic, logistical and socio-structural constraints. Sanitation demand generation was difficult for local implementing NGOs as village populations had lost trust in organisations due to previous indications of fraud. Agencies or organisations implementing sanitation campaigns and conducting sanitation promotions need to enhance their staff's knowledge and build capacity in order to address important social heterogeneity within villages. This trial's registration number is NCT01214785 (October 4, 2010).

BACKGROUND: Open defecation is widely practiced in India. To improve sanitation and promote better health, the Government of India (GOI) has instituted large scale sanitation programmes supporting construction of public and institutional toilets and extending financial subsidies for poor families in rural areas for building individual household latrines. Nevertheless, many household latrines in rural India, built with government subsidies and the facilitation and support of non-government organizations (NGO), remain unused. Literature on social, cultural and behavioural aspects that constrain latrine adoption and use in rural India is limited. This paper examines defecation patterns of different groups of people in rural areas of Odisha state in India to identify causes and determinants of latrine non-use, with a special focus on government-subsidized latrine owners, and shortcomings in household sanitation infrastructure built with government subsidies. METHODS: An exploratory study using qualitative methods was conducted in rural communities in Odisha state. Methods used were focus group discussions (FGDs), and observations of latrines and interviews with their owners. FGDs were held with frontline NGO sanitation program staff, and with community members, separately by caste, gender, latrine type, and age group. Data were analysed using a thematic framework and approach. RESULTS: Government subsidized latrines were mostly found unfinished. Many counted as complete per government standards for disbursement of financial subsidies to contracted NGOs were not accepted by their owners and termed as 'incomplete'. These latrines lacked a roof, door, adequate walls and any provision for water supply in or near the cabin, whereas rural people had elaborate processes of cleansing with water post defecation, making presence of a nearby water source important. Habits, socialising, sanitation rituals and daily routines varying with caste, gender, marital status, age and lifestyle, also hindered the adoption of latrines. Interest in constructing latrines was observed among male heads for their female members especially a newlywed daughter-in-law, reflecting concerns for their privacy, security, and convenience. This paper elaborates on these different factors. CONCLUSIONS: Findings show that providing infrastructure does not ensure use when there are significant and culturally engrained behavioural barriers to using latrines. Future sanitation programmes in rural India need to focus on understanding and addressing these behavioural barriers.

BACKGROUND: Household water treatment can improve the microbiological quality of drinking water and may prevent diarrheal diseases. However, current methods of treating water at home have certain shortcomings, and there is evidence of bias in the reported health impact of the intervention in open trial designs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We undertook a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial among 240 households (1,144 persons) in rural Democratic Republic of Congo to assess the field performance, use and effectiveness of a novel filtration device in preventing diarrhea. Households were followed up monthly for 12 months. Filters and placebos were monitored for longevity and for microbiological performance by comparing thermotolerant coliform (TTC) levels in influent and effluent water samples. Mean longitudinal prevalence of diarrhea was estimated among participants of all ages. Compliance was assessed through self-reported use and presence of water in the top vessel of the device at the time of visit. Over the 12-month follow-up period, data were collected for 11,236 person-weeks of observation (81.8% total possible). After adjusting for clustering within the household, the longitudinal prevalence ratio of diarrhoea was 0.85 (95% confidence interval: 0.61-1.20). The filters achieved a 2.98 log reduction in TTC levels while, for reasons that are unclear, the placebos achieved a 1.05 log reduction (p<0.0001). After 8 months, 68% of intervention households met the study's definition of current users, though most (73% of adults and 95% of children) also reported drinking untreated water the previous day. The filter maintained a constant flow rate over time, though 12.4% of filters were damaged during the course of the study. CONCLUSIONS: While the filter was effective in improving water quality, our results provide little evidence that it was protective against diarrhea. The moderate reduction observed nevertheless supports the need for larger studies that measure impact against a neutral placebo. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN03844341.

Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) practices emerged as a critical component to controlling and preventing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted 131 semi-structured phone interviews with households in rural Odisha, India to understand behavior changes made in WASH practices as a result of the pandemic and challenges that would prevent best practices. Interviews were conducted from May-July 2020 with 73 heads of household, 37 caregivers of children less than five years old, and 21 members of village water and sanitation committees in villages with community-level piped water and high levels of latrine ownership. The majority of respondents (86%, N=104) reported a change in their handwashing practice due to COVID-19 or the related government lockdown, typically describing an increase in handwashing frequency, more thorough washing method, and/or use of soap. These improved handwashing practices remained in place a few months after the pandemic began and were often described as a new consistent practice after additional daily actions (such as returning home), suggesting new habit formation. Few participants (13%) reported barriers to handwashing. Some respondents also detailed improvements in other WASH behaviors including village-level cleaning of water tanks and/or treatment of piped water (48% of villages), household water treatment and storage (17% of respondents), and household cleaning (41% of respondents). However, there was minimal change in latrine use and child feces management practices as a result of the pandemic. We provide detailed thematic summaries of qualitative responses to allow for richer insights into these WASH behavior changes, or lack thereof, during the pandemic. The results also highlight the importance of ensuring communities have adequate WASH infrastructure to enable the practice of safe behaviors and strengthen resilience during a large-scale health crisis.

BACKGROUND: Despite health benefits of sanitation, an estimated 12% of the global population practices open defecation, including an estimated 50% of the population of India. Current estimates, however, do not include households that own toilets but do not use them, suggesting that the actual number of people defecating in the open is underestimated. This protocol describes a cluster randomized controlled trial to evaluate an intervention specifically designed to increase latrine use, including the safe disposal of child feces, in rural Odisha, India. METHODS: The trial engages 66 villages in Puri district, 33 randomly allocated to receive the intervention and 33 to serve as controls. The primary outcome is latrine use and is recorded at baseline and endline for all members of all households that own latrines in all trial vilalges. Additional data on determinants of latrine use and safe child feces disposal are also collected to assess change based on the intervetntion. A process evaluation assesses the delivery of the intervention and qualiative research takes place in non-trial villages as well as post-endline in trial villages to help explain trial findings. DISCUSSION: This is one of four trials taking place simultaneously in rural India with latrine use as the primary outcome. All four studies use the same outcome to gerenate comparable data across sites that can serve the government of India. The trial in Odisha is unique in that it collects latrine use data from all potential users in all households that own latrines, enabling a thorough view of the sanitation situation and factors that influence use at the community level. That latrine use is collected via self-report is a limitation, however any bias in reporting should be the same across villages and not impact the overall assessment of intervention impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03274245 .

BACKGROUND: Unsafe disposal of child faeces is persistent and may lead to considerable impact on the health of young children. Research is limited on the impact of sanitation or hygiene interventions to improve child faeces disposal practices. METHODS: In the context of a randomised controlled trial to assess the health impact of a programme in Odisha, India, to promote rural sanitation under the Government of India's Total Sanitation Campaign, we explored whether the intervention affected the safe disposal of faeces of children under-5 years of age. RESULTS: At baseline, 1.1% of households practised 'safe' disposal of child faeces, either disposing it in a toilet or by burial. The intervention increased safe disposal of child faeces to 10.4% in intervention households, compared to 3.1% in the control households (RR 3.34; 95% CI 1.99-5.59). This increase in safe disposal is attributable to increases in latrine presence in the intervention communities; the intervention did not change safe disposal practices above and beyond the increase in latrine coverage. CONCLUSIONS: The very modest increase in safe disposal, while statistically significant, is not likely to have consequential health benefit. To achieve open defecation free communities, sanitation interventions will need to develop behaviour change approaches to explicitly target safe disposal behaviours.

BACKGROUND: An estimated 2.5 billion people worldwide lack access to improved sanitation facilities. While large-scale programs in some countries have increased latrine coverage, they sometimes fail to ensure optimal latrine use, including the safe disposal of child feces, a significant source of exposure to fecal pathogens. We undertook a cross-sectional study to explore fecal disposal practices among children in rural Orissa, India in villages where the Government of India's Total Sanitation Campaign had been implemented at least three years prior to the study. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted surveys with heads of 136 households with 145 children under 5 years of age in 20 villages. We describe defecation and feces disposal practices and explore associations between safe disposal and risk factors. Respondents reported that children commonly defecated on the ground, either inside the household (57.5%) for pre-ambulatory children or around the compound (55.2%) for ambulatory children. Twenty percent of pre-ambulatory children used potties and nappies; the same percentage of ambulatory children defecated in a latrine. While 78.6% of study children came from 106 households with a latrine, less than a quarter (22.8%) reported using them for disposal of child feces. Most child feces were deposited with other household waste, both for pre-ambulatory (67.5%) and ambulatory (58.1%) children. After restricting the analysis to households owning a latrine, the use of a nappy or potty was associated with safe disposal of feces (OR 6.72, 95%CI 1.02-44.38) though due to small sample size the regression could not adjust for confounders. CONCLUSIONS: In the area surveyed, the Total Sanitation Campaign has not led to high levels of safe disposal of child feces. Further research is needed to identify the actual scope of this potential gap in programming, the health risk presented and interventions to minimize any adverse effect.