Nudging to use: Achieving safe water behaviors in Kenya and Bangladesh

Luoto, Jill; Levine, David I.; Albert, Jeff; Luby, Stephen P.

doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2014.02.010

Cited by 36 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It might therefore be the case the social desirability bias (Grimm, 2010) actually exists. This has been found in other studies (Luoto, Levine, Albert, & Luby, 2014;Meshnick, 2015) and so this might bias our results upwards.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 51%

Can Community-Based Health Insurance Nudge Preventive Health Behaviours? Evidence from Rural Uganda

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The CENTER FOR DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH (ZEF) was established in 1995 as an international, interdisciplinary research institute at the University of Bonn. Research and teaching at ZEF address political, economic and ecological development problems. ZEF closely cooperates with national and international partners in research and development organizations. For information, see: www.zef.de. ZEF-Discussion Papers on Development Policy are intended to stimulate discussion among researchers, practitioners and policy makers on current and emerging development issues. Each paper has been exposed to an internal discussion within the Center for Development Research (ZEF) and an external review. The papers mostly reflect work in progress. The Editorial Committee of the ZEF-DISCUSSION PAPERS ON DEVELOPMENT POLICY includes Joachim von Braun (Chair), Christian Borgemeister, and Eva Youkhana. Chiara Kofol is the Managing Editor of the series.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 51%

Can Community-Based Health Insurance Nudge Preventive Health Behaviours? Evidence from Rural Uganda

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ahuja et al (139) provide a good review of education and social marketing efforts aimed at increasing rates of usage of safe water systems. These include dissemination of information regarding local water quality (155,156), commitments from and reminders to community members (157), and messages showing the health and social desirability outcomes from using safe water. Mosler et al (158) tested several different types of outreach and promotional activities and found household visits by trained promoters to be the most effective.…”

Section: Microbial Contaminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safe Drinking Water for Low-Income Regions

Amrose¹,

Burt

Ray

2015

Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Well into the 21st century, safe and affordable drinking water remains an unmet human need. At least 1.8 billion people are potentially exposed to microbial contamination, and close to 140 million people are potentially exposed to unsafe levels of arsenic. Many new technologies, water quality assessments, health impact assessments, cost studies, and user preference studies have emerged in the past 20 years to further the laudable goal of safe drinking water for all. This article reviews (a) the current literature on safe water approaches with respect to their effectiveness in improving water quality and protectiveness in improving human health, (b) new work on the uptake and use of safe water systems among low-income consumers, (c) new research on the cash and labor costs of safe water systems, and (d) research on user preferences and valuations for safe water. Our main recommendation is that safe water from "source to sip" should be seen as a system; this entire system, rather than a discrete intervention, should be the object of analysis for technical, economic, and health assessments.

show abstract

“…Similarly, how the intervention lead to reduction in self-reported fevers or diarrhea? First, like all informational interventions, water quality testing is expected to lead to better knowledge of water quality issues and therefore lead to behavioral changes (Brown et al, 2014; Devoto, Duflo, Dupas, Pariente, & Pons, 2012; Hamoudi et al, 2012; Luoto, Levine, Albert, & Luby, 2014). Water quality testing complemented with information component presents credible evidence to households on the need to change behavior to reverse a potentially adverse condition of poor health outcomes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Household Water Quality Testing and Information: Identifying Impacts on Health Outcomes and Sanitation- and Hygiene-Related Risk-Mitigating Behaviors

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In 2014, a group of 512 households in multipurpose water systems and also relying on unimproved water, sanitation, and hygiene practices in the Greater Accra region of Ghana were randomly selected to participate in water quality self-testing and also receipt of information in the form of handouts on how to improve water quality. Objectives and Research Design: Using a cluster-randomized controlled design, we study the health, sanitation, and hygiene behavior impacts of the household water quality testing and information experiment. Subjects: The study has three arms: (1) adult household members, (2) schoolgoing children, and (3) control group. Measures: The study measures the effects on handwashing with soap, cleanliness of households, and prevalence of diarrhea and self-reported fever. We also address impacts on child health and nutrition outcomes, particularly diarrhea and anthropometric outcomes. Results: We show that there is high household willingness to participate in this intervention on water quality self-testing. About 7 months after households took part in the intervention, the study finds little impacts on health outcomes and on sanitation- and hygiene-related risk-mitigating behaviors, regardless of the intervention group, either schoolchildren or adult household members. Impacts (direction and extent) are rather homogeneous for most of the outcomes across treatment groups. Conclusions: The study discusses the implications of the findings and also offers several explanations for the lack of transmission of impacts from the household water quality testing and information intervention on health outcomes and on sanitation and hygiene behaviors.

show abstract

Nudging to use: Achieving safe water behaviors in Kenya and Bangladesh

Cited by 36 publications

References 27 publications

Can Community-Based Health Insurance Nudge Preventive Health Behaviours? Evidence from Rural Uganda

Can Community-Based Health Insurance Nudge Preventive Health Behaviours? Evidence from Rural Uganda

Safe Drinking Water for Low-Income Regions

Household Water Quality Testing and Information: Identifying Impacts on Health Outcomes and Sanitation- and Hygiene-Related Risk-Mitigating Behaviors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About