Suchergebnisse

Shallow groundwater containing toxic concentrations of arsenic is the primary source of drinking water for millions of households in rural West Bengal, India. Often, this water also contains unpleasant levels of iron and non-negligible fecal contamination. Alternatives to shallow groundwater are increasingly available, including government-built deep tubewells, water purchased from independent providers, municipal piped water, and household filters. We conducted a survey of 501 households in Murshidabad district in 2014 to explore what influenced the use of available alternatives. Socioeconomic status and the perceived likelihood of gastrointestinal (GI) illness (which was associated with dissatisfaction with iron in groundwater) were the primary determinants of the use of alternatives. Arsenic knowledge was limited. The choice amongst alternatives was influenced by economic, social, and aesthetic factors, but not by health risk perceptions. The use of purchased water was rarely exclusive and was strongly associated with socioeconomic status, suggesting that this form of market-based water provision does not ensure universal access. Demand for purchased water appeared to decrease significantly shortly after free piped water became available at public taps. Our results suggest that arsenic mitigation interventions that also address co-occurring water problems (iron, GI illness) could be more effective than a focus on arsenic alone.

This is a conference paper. ; The Kenyan government estimates that 500 billion KES ($5 billion USD) are needed to achieve sanitation coverage targets in urban areas by 2030. To finance these infrastructure improvements, the Ministry of Environment, Water, and Natural Resources is looking at various financing options, including private sector participation, foreign aid, and cross-subsidies. Using a double-bound dichotomous choice method coupled with qualitative interviews, this study investigated willingness to pay for a pro-poor sanitation surcharge among customers of two Kenyan water utilities. 75% of respondents were willing to pay a surcharge, with just over half willing to pay up to 100 KES ($1 USD) per month. The primary determinants of willingness to pay were trust in the water utility to manage the pro-poor surcharge, feelings of solidarity towards people living without sanitation, and satisfaction with current water services.