Adopt or Adapt: Sanitation Technology Choices in Urbanizing Malawi

• Published in: PloS one 2016-08, Vol.11 (8), p.e0161262-e0161262
• Main Authors: Chunga, Richard M, Ensink, Jeroen H J, Jenkins, Marion W, Brown, Joe
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adaptation; Biology and Life Sciences; Choice Behavior; Chunga; Climate change; Demographic aspects; Earth Sciences; Ecology and Environmental Sciences; Emptying; End users; Environmental engineering; Family Characteristics; Health aspects; Households; Humans; Hygiene; Income; Information systems; Latrines; Low income groups; Malawi; Medicine; Medicine and Health Sciences; Motivation; Physical Sciences; Population density; Poverty; Sanitation; Sanitation - methods; Service life; Sewage - statistics & numerical data; Sludge; Social sciences; Socioeconomic Factors; Studies; Surveys and Questionnaires; Technology; Technology Acceptance Model; Toilet Facilities - statistics & numerical data; Tropical diseases; Urban areas; Urban Population - statistics & numerical data; Urbanization
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161262

This paper presents the results of a mixed-methods study examining adaptation strategies that property owners in low-income, rapidly urbanizing areas in Malawi adopt to address the limitations of pit latrines, the most common method of disposing human excreta. A particular challenge is lack of space for constructing new latrines as population density increases: traditional practice has been to cap full pits and simply move to a new site, but increasing demands on space require new approaches to extend the service life of latrines. In this context, we collected data on sanitation technology choices from January to September 2013 through 48 in-depth interviews and a stated preference survey targeting 1,300 property owners from 27 low-income urban areas. Results showed that property owners with concern about space for replacing pit latrines were 1.8 times more likely to select pit emptying service over the construction of new pit latrines with a slab floor (p = 0.02) but there was no significant association between concern about space for replacing pit latrines and intention to adopt locally promoted, novel sanitation technology known as ecological sanitation (ecosan). Property owners preferred to adapt existing, known technology by constructing replacement pit latrines on old pit latrine locations, reducing the frequency of replacing pit latrines, or via emptying pit latrines when full. This study highlights potential challenges to adoption of wholly new sanitation technologies, even when they present clear advantages to end users. To scale, alternative sanitation technologies for rapidly urbanising cities should offer clear advantages, be affordable, be easy to use when shared among multiple households, and their design should be informed by existing adaptation strategies and local knowledge.