Willingness to pay for improvements in rural sanitation: Evidence from a cross-sectional survey of three rural counties in Kenya.

Poor sanitation worldwide leads to an annual loss of approximately $222.9 billion and is the second leading cause of Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALY's) lost due to diarrhoea. Yet in Kenya, the slow rate and levels at which the household's access improved sanitation facilities remain a concern, and it is unknown if the cost of new technologies is a barrier to access. This study assessed the maximum willingness to pay (WTP) for SAFI and SATO sanitation products and identified those factors that affect the willingness to pay (WTP) valuation estimates by households in three counties in Kenya. It used quantitative economic evaluation research integrated within a cross-sectional survey. Contingent valuation method (CVM) was used to determine the maximum WTP for sanitation in households. We used the logistic regression model in data analysis. A total of 211 households were interviewed in each county, giving a total sample size of 633 households. The mean WTP for SAFI latrines was $153.39 per household, while the mean WTP for SATO pans and SATO stools was $11.49 and $14.77 respectively. For SAFI latrines, households in Kakamega were willing to pay $6.6 more than average while in Siaya, the households were willing to pay $5.1 less than the average. The main determinants of households WTP for the two sanitation products included household's proximity to the toilet (p = 0.0001), household income (β = .2245741, p = 0.004), sanitation product (β = -2968.091; p = 0.004), socioeconomic status (β = -3305.728, p = 0.004) and a household's satisfaction level with the current toilet (β = -4570.602; p = 0.0001). Increased proximity of households to the toilet, higher incomes, and providing loan facilities or subsidy to poor households could increase the demand for these sanitation technologies.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

This study was undertaken by a Kenyan based consultancy firm, here in referred to as AMREC consultants, and was conducted as part of a consultancy assignment funded by the USAID-KIWASH project. Though the study received no grants for research, we hereby declare competing financial interest from salaries received to support authors to execute the study. Additionally, none of the sanitation technologies assessed belong to USAID/KIWASH project or AMREC. The decision to publish was exclusively made by authors in a bid to contribute to the sanitation sector knowledge. USAID/KIWASH project will neither directly benefit from this publication nor did it play any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. This engagement does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.