The Dirty Business of Open Defecation: Lessons from a

Sanitation Intervention Lisa Cameron, Paul Gertler, and

Manisha Shah

WSP Asked “What works?”

• Evaluation of “at scale” interventions in 7 countries – 4 TSSM – 3 Hand Washing

• Coordinated – Same outcomes – Rigorous causal methods

• WSP learning agenda – Large team of IE experts & operational staff – BMGF funding

Social Marketing Events +

Communication Campaign

Demand side Social Marketing of Sanitation:

Supply side

Popularize improved sanitation

Sanitation choice catalogue

Training masons

3

Total Sanitation and Sanitation Marketing in Indonesia (SToPs)

Behavior Change Communications :

2

Community-led Total Sanitation:

Demand side

Stop OD by raising awareness

“map” the village

“walk of shame”

Triggers community action

Action plan & monitoring

1

3

Basic IE Questions What is the overall Impact of TSSM on • Sanitation improvement

and construction • Open Defecation • Health

– Diarrhea – Parasites – Anemia – Height and weight

Advanced IE Questions

2. Decomposition of overall OD effect into

– Sanitation construction – Increased use of

sanitation (behavioral)

3. Liquidity constraints

4. Effects of stronger implementation

I. Theory of Change II. IE Design III. Results

I. Sanitation

II. Open Defecation

III. Health Outcomes

IV. Implementation issues V. Policy Messages

Today….

6

Conceptual Framework

D = Open Defecation Rate T = Share of households that have sanitation DT = Open Defecation Rate of HHs with Sanitation DNT = Open Defecation Rate of HHs without Sanitation

Decompose Open Defecation Rate into:

TSSM Pathways To Reduce OD

Indonesia and East Java

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/factbook/id/map.html

Randomly Sampled 160 communities (‘dusun’ or hamlet)

Randomly Assigned to

8 of 10 districts participated in study

Treatment 80 dusuns

Random Sample 1046 HHs

East Java: 29 districts total 10 districts in TSSM Phase 2

Control

80 dusuns Random Sample

1041 HHs

Sampling & Experimental Design

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.18

0.2

All Sanitation atBaseline

No Sanitation atBaseline

Sanitation Improvement/Construction Between Baseline & Endline

TreatmentControl

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

No Sanitation atBaseline

No BL SanNonPoor

No BL San Poor

Sanitation Construction by SES

TreatmentControl

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

All No Sanitation atBaseline

Sanitation atBaseline

Open Defecation at Endline

Treatment

Control

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

San at BL & EL No San at & San at EL No San at Bl & No Sanat EL

Open Defecation Conditional on BL & EL Sanitation

TreatmentControl

Decomposition of Δ in OD

• Total estimated effect of TSSM on OD = -.07 • Components:

– Δ in sanitation .038*(.24-.83) = -0.038*0.61 = -0.02

– Δ in use of those that have sanitation -0.06*0.5 = -0.03 – Δ in use of those who do not have sanitation -0.04*0.5 = -.02

• Note that they add up to -0.07

Messages

• TSSM reduced mostly through behavioral change Explained 70% of the reduction in OD

• Less successful through sanitation construction

• Big potential gains from sanitation construction 8% reduction in OD from 10% in sanitation

• 6% from sanitation construction (.24-.83) • 2% from increased use of sanitation (0.6 – 0.2)

TSSM in Indonesia only increased sanitation by 3.8% At baseline only 50% had sanitation

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Tenancy Issues

Permit Issues

Too Comples

Water not available

No one to build

Soil Conditions

No materials available

Satisfied with current

No Savings

Other

Space

High Cost

Obstacles to Building Sanitation

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Households (IE)

Villages (IE)

Villages (Admin)

Implementation: % Triggered

Control Treatment

What If All Villages Were Triggered?

Results Summary

• TSSM was successful at – Reducing OD – Improving health outcomes

• Mostly worked through behavioral change • Less successful at motivating sanitation construction • Big potential gains through sanitation construction

– Cost and liquidity constraints biggest obstacles • Full implementation increases effects by 40% • Repeating with India Data now & Tanzania soon

Policy Messages

• TSSM (CLTS) model – Improves health primarily thru behavioral change – Less successful through sanitation construction

• Need to strengthen sanitation components – Subsidized prices – Credit – Community financing

• Need to Improve implementation

The Dirty Business of Open Defecation: Lessons from a Sanitation InterventionWSP Asked “What works?”Total Sanitation and Sanitation Marketing in Indonesia (SToPs)Basic IE QuestionsAdvanced IE QuestionsSlide Number 6Conceptual FrameworkTSSM Pathways To Reduce OD Indonesia and East JavaSampling & Experimental Design�Slide Number 11Slide Number 12Slide Number 13Slide Number 14Slide Number 15Slide Number 16Slide Number 17Decomposition of Δ in OD MessagesSlide Number 20Slide Number 21Slide Number 22Slide Number 23Slide Number 24What If All Villages Were Triggered?Results SummaryPolicy MessagesSlide Number 28