Cross-subsidies for improved sanitation in low income settlements: Assessing the willingness to pay of water utility customers in Kenyan cities

Acey, Charisma; Kisiangani, Joyce; Ronoh, Patrick; Delaire, Caroline; Makena, E.; Norman, Guy; Levine, David I.; Khush, Ranjiv; Peletz, Rachel

doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.11.006

Cited by 42 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To examine factors associated with WTP, we conducted bivariate analyses of mean stated WTP using sample t-tests for binary variables and an analysis of variance (ANOVA) for categorical variables (e.g., wealth quintiles and education levels). We also examined factors associated with WTP in multivariate models using maximum likelihood functions for the double-bound dichotomous choice method [8]. To examine factors associated with voucher redemption, we conducted bivariate and multivariate analyses using logistic regression.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alternatively, if the respondent answered "no" to the first question, we then queried their willingness to pay a lower amount. Providing a sequence of questions motivates respondents think about a relevant price range [1,18,19], and other studies of WTP for water and sanitation products and services have applied similar dichotomous choice methods [6,8,19,28,29]. We followed the dichotomous choice questions with an open-ended question asking respondents to state the highest amount they would be willing to pay [30].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

When pits fill up: Supply and demand for safe pit-emptying services in Kisumu, Kenya

Peletz¹,

MacLeod²,

Kones³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improving sanitation conditions in low-income communities is a major challenge for rapidly growing cities of the developing world. The expenses and logistical difficulties of extending sewerage infrastructure have focused increasing attention on the requirements for safe and cost-effective fecal sludge management services. These services, which are primarily provided by the private sector, include the collection and treatment of fecal waste from latrine pits and septic tanks. To determine the degree to which market forces can promote safe fecal sludge removal in low-income neighborhoods of Kisumu, Kenya, we compared household willingness-to-pay for formal pit emptying with the prices charged by service providers. Through surveys of 942 households and a real-money voucher trial with 646 households, we found that stated and revealed demand for formal emptying services were both low, with less than 20% of households willing to pay full market prices. Our results suggest that improving fecal sludge management in these neighborhoods via the private sector will require large subsides, ranging from 55.1-81.4 million KES (551,000-814,000 USD) annually, to address the gap between willingness-to-pay and market prices. Raising and administering subsidies of this scale will require the development of a city-wide sanitation master plan that includes investment, management, and regulatory procedures for fecal sludge management. In the absence of government investment and coordination, it is unlikely that the private sector will address safe sanitation needs in low-income areas of Kisumu.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

When pits fill up: Supply and demand for safe pit-emptying services in Kisumu, Kenya

Peletz¹,

MacLeod²,

Kones³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In effect, our participants were saying that the specific design of the policy does not account for their poverty, and that if the policy were to be redesigned, at least some households would build a latrine despite financial stress. This is important given that various studies confirm that well-designed subsidies can play an important role in improving coverage [14,58,59].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Open Defecation in the Age of Swachh Bharat Abhiyan: Agency, Accountability, and Anger in Rural Bihar

Jain

Wagner

Snell‐Rood

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Swachh Bharat Abhiyan, India’s flagship sanitation intervention, set out to end open defecation by October 2019. While the program improved toilet coverage nationally, large regional disparities in construction and use remain. Our study used ethnographic methods to explore perspectives on open defecation and latrine use, and the socio-economic and political reasons for these perspectives, in rural Bihar. We draw on insights from social epidemiology and political ecology to explore the structural determinants of latrine ownership and use. Though researchers have often pointed to rural residents’ preference for open defecation, we found that people were aware of its many risks. We also found that (i) while sanitation research and “behavior change” campaigns often conflate the reluctance to adopt latrines with a preference for open defecation, this is an erroneous conflation; (ii) a subsidy can help (some) households to construct latrines but the amount of the subsidy and the manner of its disbursement are key to its usefulness; and (iii) widespread resentment towards what many rural residents view as a development bias against rural areas reinforces distrust towards the government overall and its Swachh Bharat Abhiyan-funded latrines in particular. These social-structural explanations for the slow uptake of sanitation in rural Bihar (and potentially elsewhere) deserve more attention in sanitation research and promotion efforts.

show abstract

“…While several recent studies have provided critical financial perspectives for urban sanitation, they have focused on discrete aspects of the issue. These include: studies of willingness to pay (for example, Vásquez and Alicea-Planas, 2018;Acey et al, 2019;Tidwell et al, 2019); the business case and cost recovery for fecal sludge management (e.g., Andersson et al, 2017;Blackett and Hawkins, 2017;Otoo and Drechsel, 2018); and analysis of the pro-poor reach of infrastructure investments (Hutchings et al, 2018). Analyses comparing sewer and onsite technologies exist (Dodane et al, 2012;McConville et al, 2019) but can be limited by inconsistent analytical boundaries due to the exclusion of costs borne by households (for example Stantec, 2019).…”

Section: Costmentioning

confidence: 99%

Costs, Climate and Contamination: Three Drivers for Citywide Sanitation Investment Decisions

Mills

Willetts

Evans

et al. 2020

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significant progress is needed, in both large cities and small towns, to meet the ambitious targets set at international and national levels relating to universal access to safely managed sanitation. There has been increased recognition in the urban sanitation sector that in rapidly growing cities, there is unlikely to be a single centralized sanitation solution which can effectively deliver services to all demographics, and that heterogeneous approaches to urban sanitation are required. At the same time, due to competing investment priorities, there is a greater focus on the need for sanitation investments to address multiple objectives. However, calls for more informed sanitation planning and a more dynamic and disaggregated approach to the delivery and management of sanitation services have had limited impacts. This is in part due to the complexity of the drivers for sanitation investment, and the difficulties involved in identifying and addressing these multiple, often conflicting, goals. This paper examines three potential drivers of citywide sanitation decision-making-public health, sustainability and economic performance-via the three proxies of contamination, climate change and costs. It examines the importance of each driver and proxies, how they are considered in investment decisions, the current state of knowledge about them, and priority aspects to be included in decisions. At present, while public health is a common driver for improving sanitation, there are significant gaps in our understanding of fecal contamination spread and exposure, and how to select sanitation solutions which can best address them. Climate change is sometimes seen as a low priority for the sanitation sector given the immediacy and scale of existing challenges and the uncertainty of future climate predictions. However, potential risks are significant, and uninformed decisions may result in greater costs and increased inequalities. Cost data are sparse and unreliable, and it is challenging to build robust cost-effectiveness analyses. Yet these are needed to compare citywide options based on least-cost over their full life cycle. This paper provides insights into how existing evidence on contamination, climate change and costs can inform decisions on sanitation investments and help chart a sustainable way forward for achieving citywide services.

show abstract

Cross-subsidies for improved sanitation in low income settlements: Assessing the willingness to pay of water utility customers in Kenyan cities

Cited by 42 publications

References 41 publications

When pits fill up: Supply and demand for safe pit-emptying services in Kisumu, Kenya

When pits fill up: Supply and demand for safe pit-emptying services in Kisumu, Kenya

Understanding Open Defecation in the Age of Swachh Bharat Abhiyan: Agency, Accountability, and Anger in Rural Bihar

Costs, Climate and Contamination: Three Drivers for Citywide Sanitation Investment Decisions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About