马达加斯加东南部农村低成本家庭雨水收集:一个过程和结果评估

Jasmine Kelly, Mamonjisoa Tsilahatsy, Tolotra Carnot, Ramanantsiadiana Wilmin Fidelos, Giona Randriamanampy, Andrianarivelo Zafindrazana Charlier, Emilie Kowalczewski, Lomba Hasoavana, Mamy Andriatsihosena, Harry Chaplin, Hugo Legge
{"title":"马达加斯加东南部农村低成本家庭雨水收集:一个过程和结果评估","authors":"Jasmine Kelly, Mamonjisoa Tsilahatsy, Tolotra Carnot, Ramanantsiadiana Wilmin Fidelos, Giona Randriamanampy, Andrianarivelo Zafindrazana Charlier, Emilie Kowalczewski, Lomba Hasoavana, Mamy Andriatsihosena, Harry Chaplin, Hugo Legge","doi":"10.1371/journal.pwat.0000053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In settings where communities rely on unimproved water sources, household rainwater harvesting (HRWH) may improve the quality and quantity of water available. This research presents results from a two-year controlled before-and-after study that evaluated the impact of low-cost HRWH on household water collection habits, hygiene practices and prevalence of childhood diarrhoea in rural Madagascar. The study assessed system functionality, water quality and the acceptability of requesting household financial investment (16–20 USD). Surveys were administered to enrolled intervention households (n = 138) and control households (n = 276) at baseline and endline. Water quality tests at endline compared microbial contamination in a sub-sample of HRWH systems (n = 22) and public water sources (n = 8). Difference-in-difference analyses were used to compare changes in outcomes between study arms at baseline and endline. At endline 111 (75%) of systems were functional with an average age of 1.25 years. Microbial contamination was 39.3 TTC/100ml in community water sources compared with 23.3 TTC/100ml in the HRWH systems (coef: -16.0, 95CI: -37.3 to 5.2, p = 0.133). 85 (57%) of households completed their repayment plans while remaining households owed on average 3.7 USD. There was weak evidence to suggest that intervention households collected more water per capita day than controls (adj coefficient: 3.45; 95CI: -2.51 to 9.41, p = 0.257). Intervention households had 11% higher absolute risk of owning a handwashing station compared against controls (95CI: 0.00 to 0.23; p = 0.06). There was no evidence of differences in ownership of soap or prevalence of childhood diarrhoea between study arms. Overall, operation and maintenance of the systems remained high, users demonstrated willingness to pay, and there was weak evidence that water provision at the household increased domestic consumption. However, the systems did not provide contaminant-free water. We conclude that HRWH using low-cost, locally available materials can increase household access to water in areas reliant on limited communal water sources.","PeriodicalId":93672,"journal":{"name":"PLOS water","volume":"27 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Low-cost domestic rainwater harvesting in rural southeast Madagascar: A process and outcome evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Jasmine Kelly, Mamonjisoa Tsilahatsy, Tolotra Carnot, Ramanantsiadiana Wilmin Fidelos, Giona Randriamanampy, Andrianarivelo Zafindrazana Charlier, Emilie Kowalczewski, Lomba Hasoavana, Mamy Andriatsihosena, Harry Chaplin, Hugo Legge\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pwat.0000053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In settings where communities rely on unimproved water sources, household rainwater harvesting (HRWH) may improve the quality and quantity of water available. This research presents results from a two-year controlled before-and-after study that evaluated the impact of low-cost HRWH on household water collection habits, hygiene practices and prevalence of childhood diarrhoea in rural Madagascar. The study assessed system functionality, water quality and the acceptability of requesting household financial investment (16–20 USD). Surveys were administered to enrolled intervention households (n = 138) and control households (n = 276) at baseline and endline. Water quality tests at endline compared microbial contamination in a sub-sample of HRWH systems (n = 22) and public water sources (n = 8). Difference-in-difference analyses were used to compare changes in outcomes between study arms at baseline and endline. At endline 111 (75%) of systems were functional with an average age of 1.25 years. Microbial contamination was 39.3 TTC/100ml in community water sources compared with 23.3 TTC/100ml in the HRWH systems (coef: -16.0, 95CI: -37.3 to 5.2, p = 0.133). 85 (57%) of households completed their repayment plans while remaining households owed on average 3.7 USD. There was weak evidence to suggest that intervention households collected more water per capita day than controls (adj coefficient: 3.45; 95CI: -2.51 to 9.41, p = 0.257). Intervention households had 11% higher absolute risk of owning a handwashing station compared against controls (95CI: 0.00 to 0.23; p = 0.06). There was no evidence of differences in ownership of soap or prevalence of childhood diarrhoea between study arms. Overall, operation and maintenance of the systems remained high, users demonstrated willingness to pay, and there was weak evidence that water provision at the household increased domestic consumption. However, the systems did not provide contaminant-free water. We conclude that HRWH using low-cost, locally available materials can increase household access to water in areas reliant on limited communal water sources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93672,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLOS water\",\"volume\":\"27 4\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLOS water\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000053\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLOS water","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在社区依赖未经改善的水源的环境中,家庭雨水收集(HRWH)可以改善可用水的质量和数量。这项研究介绍了一项为期两年的前后对照研究的结果,该研究评估了低成本的卫生保健对马达加斯加农村家庭取水习惯、卫生习惯和儿童腹泻患病率的影响。该研究评估了系统功能、水质和要求家庭投资的可接受性(16-20美元)。在基线和终点对纳入的干预家庭(n = 138)和对照家庭(n = 276)进行调查。终点的水质测试比较了HRWH系统(n = 22)和公共水源(n = 8)的子样本中的微生物污染。采用差异中差异分析来比较基线和终点研究组之间结果的变化。在末线111(75%),系统功能正常,平均年龄为1.25年。社区水源的微生物污染为39.3 TTC/100ml,而HRWH系统为23.3 TTC/100ml(系数:-16.0,95% ci: -37.3 ~ 5.2, p = 0.133)。85%(57%)的家庭完成了还款计划,其余家庭平均欠款3.7美元。有微弱的证据表明,干预家庭的人均日用水量高于对照组(adj系数:3.45;95CI: -2.51 ~ 9.41, p = 0.257)。干预家庭拥有洗手站的绝对风险比对照组高11% (95CI: 0.00至0.23;P = 0.06)。没有证据表明两组研究对象在肥皂拥有率或儿童腹泻患病率方面存在差异。总的来说,这些系统的操作和维修费用仍然很高,用户表示愿意付费,而且没有多少证据表明家庭供水增加了家庭消费。然而,这些系统并没有提供无污染的水。我们的结论是,在依赖有限公共水源的地区,使用低成本、当地可获得的材料的卫生保健机构可以增加家庭用水。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Low-cost domestic rainwater harvesting in rural southeast Madagascar: A process and outcome evaluation
In settings where communities rely on unimproved water sources, household rainwater harvesting (HRWH) may improve the quality and quantity of water available. This research presents results from a two-year controlled before-and-after study that evaluated the impact of low-cost HRWH on household water collection habits, hygiene practices and prevalence of childhood diarrhoea in rural Madagascar. The study assessed system functionality, water quality and the acceptability of requesting household financial investment (16–20 USD). Surveys were administered to enrolled intervention households (n = 138) and control households (n = 276) at baseline and endline. Water quality tests at endline compared microbial contamination in a sub-sample of HRWH systems (n = 22) and public water sources (n = 8). Difference-in-difference analyses were used to compare changes in outcomes between study arms at baseline and endline. At endline 111 (75%) of systems were functional with an average age of 1.25 years. Microbial contamination was 39.3 TTC/100ml in community water sources compared with 23.3 TTC/100ml in the HRWH systems (coef: -16.0, 95CI: -37.3 to 5.2, p = 0.133). 85 (57%) of households completed their repayment plans while remaining households owed on average 3.7 USD. There was weak evidence to suggest that intervention households collected more water per capita day than controls (adj coefficient: 3.45; 95CI: -2.51 to 9.41, p = 0.257). Intervention households had 11% higher absolute risk of owning a handwashing station compared against controls (95CI: 0.00 to 0.23; p = 0.06). There was no evidence of differences in ownership of soap or prevalence of childhood diarrhoea between study arms. Overall, operation and maintenance of the systems remained high, users demonstrated willingness to pay, and there was weak evidence that water provision at the household increased domestic consumption. However, the systems did not provide contaminant-free water. We conclude that HRWH using low-cost, locally available materials can increase household access to water in areas reliant on limited communal water sources.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Assessing state partner use of the Model Aquatic Health Code (MAHC): A cross comparison of five states with varying degrees of self-reported adoption status Virtual water flows in a real world Optimizing machine learning for water safety: A comparative analysis with dimensionality reduction and classifier performance in potability prediction Assessing the sustained effects of a water filter intervention: A 30-month longitudinal study in Rwamagana, Rwanda 222 nm causes greater protein damage and repair inhibition of E. coli than 254 nm for water disinfection
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1