Importance of triggers and veto-barriers for the implementation of sanitation in informal peri-urban settlements – The case of Cochabamba, Bolivia

Abstract

An estimated 2.4 billion people lack access to improved sanitation which has devastating consequences for human health and the environment. Understanding what constitute sanitation demand is crucial for accelerating the spread of improved sanitation. This study aims to understand the adoption mechanisms for improved sanitation. An informal peri-urban settlement in Cochabamba, Bolivia was selected as a case study to understand adoption patterns. Various qualitative methods of data collection and analysis were employed. The findings showed that pour-flush toilets was the only preferred sanitation alternative at the study site. An adoption framework for waterborne toilets was developed based on diffusion of innovation theory. Factors that influence adoption were identified. Some functioned as triggers and initiated adoption, whereas some factors blocked adoption and constituted veto-barriers. Most factors were connected to the individual household situation and its members, but neighborhood development also affected pour-flush adoption. Based on adoption time the residents were divided into the following adoption groups: first adopters, early majority, late majority, laggards and non-adopters. Each adoption group followed its own adoption route with specific characteristics and respective triggers or veto-barriers. We argue that the strong demand for waterborne toilets in peri-urban areas need to be recognized and the developed framework could be used for customizing sanitation improvement programs for certain target groups.

How community participation in water and sanitation interventions impacts human health, WASH infrastructure and service longevity in low-income and middle-income countries: a realist review

“…Diffusion of innovation has been widely identified as a mechanism in public health and not just in the WASH sector, for example, in the adoption of new health policies and technologies and the use of new drugs. 107 Our findings are in line with studies showing the use of diffusion of innovation in sanitation interventions, 108 109 and add to the new growing body of literature of the use of diffusion in water interventions. 110 While diffusion of innovation is an important mechanism, it is important to acknowledge the psychological and physical health benefits of what is being adopted, 111 and new behaviours may need to be adapted to meet the cultural needs of the target population 107 111 before adoption.…”

Assessing the Impact and Equity of an Integrated Rural Sanitation Approach: A Longitudinal Evaluation in 11 Sub-Saharan Africa and Asian Countries

“…This evaluation also primarily took place in areas with low baseline sanitation coverage. Like many other studies [27], it was more difficult for the SSH4A program to reach the last 10% of each study population with toilets as compared to reaching earlier adopters. The findings in this evaluation may therefore not be generalizable to areas with high initial sanitation coverage.…”

Peri-urbanization in Sacaba, Bolivia: challenges to the traditional urban planning approach

“…Similar to other peri-urban failed attempts to regularize the informal to formal (Cielo and Antequera 2012;Mehta et al 2014), peri-urban settlers cherished self-helped collective efforts as mechanisms to build bonds between settlers and strengthen their legitimacy as citizens (Helgegren et al 2018). The shared responsibility and ownership creates a sense of belonging that goes beyond their differences, which facilitates their social self-organization to fight for their oppressed citizen rights.…”

“…On one hand, peri-urban population based their acceptance of projects to the urban-rural social status to with which the project is related to, instead to assess the benefit of the project per se. For instance, Silveti and Andersson (2019) and Helgegren et al (2018) illustrate peri-urban settler's preference for flush toilets (perceived as progress and modernity), and rejection for off-grid dry toilets (perceived as the rural poor man's alternative). On the other hand, planners and citizens own perceptions about the urbanrural categories led them to underestimate each other's capacities or blame each other for problems, which worsened their relationship and diminished possibilities to agree on solutions.…”