WATER, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SANIFAHON
Item
- Title
- WATER, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SANIFAHON
- extracted text
-
WATER, AND ENVIRONMENIAL SANIFAHON
A report on KAP study
in rural India - Phase III
May
1989
ry
*
Prepared for UNITED NATIONS CHILDREN'S FUND
By INDIAN MARKET RESEARCH BUREAU
DELHI
IMRB/RI/HV/DS/40509
MWD)
Indian Market Research Bureau
CONTENTS
Page No.
THE RESPONDENTS
1
1.0
THE RESPONDENT
2
1.1
1.2
Age
Education and literacy
2
4
2;0
HOOSEHOLDS
8
2.1
2.2
8
2.3
Income
occupation
Family size and composition
3.0
COMMUNITY DATA
10
4.0
SECTION A : GENERAL HYGIENE
13
4.1
Personal hygiene practices
13
4.2
Disposal of waste
17
5.0
EXPOSURE TO MEDIA
22
9
9
SECTION B : WATER
1.0
PRACTICES WITH REGARD TO COLLECTION
30
1.1
End-uses of collected water
30
1.2
Water sources - Distance
35
1.3
Collection practices
1.4
Rain water
41
49
2.0
STORAGE AND USE OF WATER
54
2.1
Storing practices
UNDERSTANDING OF WATER
54
3.0
3.1
3.2
Good water and bad water
62
62
Water and health
68
Indian Market Research Bureau
Page No.
4.0
HANDPUMPS
74
4.1
Existence and use
74
4.2
Uses of handpump water
78
4.3
Reasons for non-use of handpump
82
4.4
Problems in the use of handpump
84
4.5
Public handpump ownership and
maintenance
87
Willingness to pay
91
4.6
SECTION C : SANITATION
1.0
DEFECATION
95
1.1
Defecation sites
95
1.2
Criteria for site selection
98
1.3
Attitudes to outdoor defecation
100
1.4
Practices related to defecation
104
1.5
Knowledge regarding open excreta and
health
109
2.0
LATRINES
112
2.1
Awareness of latrines
112
2.2
Perceptions regarding excreta disposal
115
3.0
LATRINES IN THE VILLAGE
123
3.1
Installation of latrines
123
3.2
Private latrines
131
SECTION D : VILLAGE OBSERVATION FINDINGS
1.0
Background
146
2.0
Demographic Profile
147
3.0
Water related facilities
161
4.0
Sanitation related facilities
173
5.0
Development related facilities
183
Indian Market Research Bureau
Page No.
APPENDICES
I
II
III
IV
i
ix
Sampling method
Sampling error and confidence limits
Sampling requirements for a tracking
study
Map showing districts with assured
water availability
xiv
xvi
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Title
Facing Page
Reach of different kinds of media
23
Reach of different kinds of media
24
Recall of different WES messages
25
Recall of WES message from different media
28
Usage of different sources of water
32
Usage of different sources of water
32
Uses of water
34
Average volume of water collected per
household per day (litres)
43
Who collects water for household
45
Who collects water for household
46
Who collects water for household (among men)
46
% who collect rain water
People’s perceptions on health problems
caused by'bad drinking water
49
Usage of Traditional HP water
81
Usage of Mark II HP water
81
Problems in usage of handpump
82
Perceptions of people on who owns public
handpumps
87
People's perception on who is responsible
for maintaining public handpumps
89
69
HD
b)
Indian Market Research Bureau
Facing Page
Average amount a household willing to
pay for maintenance of handpump
Average amount a household willing to
pay for handpump installation
92
93
How do people clean their hands
106
People’s perception on whether exposed
excreta is harmful to health
109
Awareness & use of latrines
113
Perceived frequency of pit cleaning
118
Existence and use of latrines
Attitudes towards having private latrines
131
Interest in getting private latrines
139
Average amount a household willing to pay
for getting private latrine
141
Is there a need to construct latrines in
villages
144
135
EwBIBi
Indian Market Research Bureau
THE RESPONDENTS
The total number of respondents interviewed in 8 states
was 4414, against planned 4400 interviews.
As mentioned
earlier, all data was weighted at the district level.
The process of weighting, with its resultant fractions
and rounding off, resulted in a weighted sample size of
4418 respondents.
The actual and weighted sample sizes by state were as
follows :
Actual
Weighted
Uttar Pradesh
602
1353
Rajasthan
604
402
West Bengal
601
595
Manipur
200
16
Tamilnadu
600
481
Andhra Pradesh
603
609
Gujarat
602
348
Madhya Pradesh
601
616
4414
4418
A total of 2407 interviews were conducted in the four
tracking districts*.
The details were as follows :
Sultanpur, Uttar Pradesh
604
Udaipur, Rajasthan
602
24 Paraganas, West Bengal
600
Amreli, Gujarat
601
2407
These 4 districts will be referred to in the report as
"the districts".
Ml
Indian Market Research Bureau
2
1.0
THE RESPONDENT
Men and women were sampled in equal numbers,
across the states and the tracking districts.
1.1
Age
They represented an average age of 31 years in the
states and 30 years in the districts.
Respondents were asked to state their age; simultaneously
our interviewers noted their estimate of the respondents’
age as prior experience with rural respondents has
revealed that some of them tend to have a very poor idea
if any,of their own age.
The data of age, as estimated
by the respondent and by our interviewers, is given
below :
8 states
4 districts
4418
2407
Base :
Respondent
estimate
Interviewer
estimate
Respondent
estimate
Interviewer
estimate
%
%
%
%
15 - 25 years
33
32
35
37
26 - 35 years
31
36
32
36
36 - 45 years
20
24
17
23
46+ years
5
8
3
4
Not specified
12
Average
29.8
13
31.2
28.8
29.8
Indian Market Research Bureau
3
In both states and in the 4 districts, 12-13?o of the
respondents could not tell their own age.
The majority of these respondents were from Uttar
Pradesh (22%), Rajasthan (10%) and Madhya Pradesh (24%).
In the districts again, 28% of the respondents from
Sultanpur and 22% from Udaipur could not tell their
age as compared to less than 2% from the other 2 districts.
Further analysis of these respondents reveal that of
those who could not tell their own age, 83% (in the 8
states) had a monthly household income of less than
Rs 750 and 92% were illiterate.
Details are given
below :
(Base : Those who could not tell their age)
8 states
4 states
Below Rs 750
13
16
Rs 751
8
6
5
8
15 - 25 years
7
13
26 - 45 years
13
13
46+ years
20
13
Can read
2
2
Cannot read
21
23
Male
4
3
F emale
20
23
Monthly household
income
1500
Rs 1501+
Age
Literacy
Sex
Indian Market Research Bureau
4
It is interesting to note that close to one fourth of
those who could not read and one fourth of women could
The two factors were correlated
not tell their age.
since 31% - 32% of men (in states and 4 districts
respectively) could not read while 69% & 68% of women
could not read.
1.2
Education and Literacy
A closer look at data by schooling reveals that,
across all respondents from the 8 states 54%
of them had attended school.
In the 4 districts, 50%
had attended school.
There were variations by state.
In West Bengal,
Manipur and Tamilnadu over 60% had attended school.
This
was also reflected in the tracking districts where 66%
of respondents in the 24 Paraganas had attended school.
Attended school
Base: All respondents
%
?0
2407
50
Total
4418
54
Total
Uttar Pradesh
1353
51
Sultanpur
38
Rajasthan
402
45
Udaipur
41
West Bengal
595
64
24 Paragans
66
Manipur
16
71
Tamilnadu
481
67
Andhra Pradesh
609
50
Amreli
53
Gujarat
348
58
Madhya Pradesh
616
45
(Table 7)
Indian Market Research Bureau
5
Those who had attended school belonged to households
with a monthly household income of over Rs 750.
Signi
ficantly larger proportions of those in the 15-25 year
age group (65%) and men ( 73% had attended school as
compared to others).
The younger age group attendance reveals a rising
trend towards schooling in villages, by those who can
afford it, for their boys at least.
73% of those who had attended school had done so for
less than 9 years,
graduates.
13% were matriculates while 4% were
(Refer Table 7a).
The highest proportion of
graduates were in Manipur (16%) followed by Uttar
Pradesh (6%).
Base : All respondents
?□ matriculate
or more
?o Schooled
14
Total
54
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
51
(38)
19
(12)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
45
(41)
11
(11)
West Bengal (24 Parga pas)
64
(66)
11
(15)
Manipur
71
44
Tamilnadu
67
12
Andhra Pradesh
50
11
Gujarat (Amreli)
58
Madhya Pradesh
45
(53)
17
(9)
7
Figures in brackets are equivalent percentage figures
for the four tracking districts.
Ml
Indian Market Research Bureau
6
Analysis of this data by age, income and sex
reveals
interesting patterns.
8 states only
% schooled
% of all matri
culate or more
Upto Rs 750
49
10
Rs 751 - 1500
63
19
Rs 15014-
78
35
15 - 25 years
65
21
26 - 45 years
50
11
46-f years
38
3
Men
73
23
Women
34
5
Base: All respondents
Monthly household
income
Age
Sex
The proportions schooled and the better educated respondents
were male, young and belonged
to upper-income households.
Earlier studies and interaction with villagers over the
years have shown that schooling and literacy are not
necessarily related unless several years had been spent in
school.
Literacy was therefore checked for all respondents,
irrespective of the years spent in school.
This was done by
showing a card to the respondent on which a simple sentence
had been written in 3-4 relevant languages (for example, in
Uttar Pradesh the sentence would be written in Hindi and
Urdu).
Respondents who could not read at all were classified
Indian Market Research Bureau
7
as those who cannot read.
Respondents who read by picking
up each individual alphabet (to connect the sounds together
in phonetic languages) were termed slow readers. Those
who could read the sentence with ease were termed fluent
readers. The distribution of readers in these 3 categories
was as follows :
Fluent
Slow
Not at all
Total
34
14
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
34 (30)
37 (30)
13 (4)
8 (10)
52
53 (66)
55 (60)
West Bengal (24 Paragans)
38 (43)
14 (13)
48 (44)
Manipur
Tamilnadu
43
26
31
32
23
Andhra Pradesh
26
18
45
57
Gujarat (Amreli)
Madhya Pradesh
40 (32)
36
16 (20)
7
44 (48)
57
Base: All respondents
?o across
64?o of respondents in households with an income of RS 1500+
per month could read fluently.
Indian Market Research Bnreao
8
2.0
HOUSEHOLDS
2.1
Income
More than half of all respondents belonged to households where the income did not exceed Rs 500 per month.
This was true of the states as well as the tracking
districts within the states.
Details by state and district were as follows :
Base : All respondents
(% across)
Rs 500
or less
Rs 501Rs 1000
Rs 1000Rs 1500
Rs 1500Rs 2500
Rs 2500+
57
29
7
5
2
Total
Uttar Pradesh
(Sultanpur)
M T75r T6“(20T _ 4 Tio)- “ 5 BT " “ T Ol
49 (75)
26 (13)
12 (7)
6 (4)
4 (2)
37 (39)
40 (42)
14 (12)
8 (4)
3 (3)
Manipur
34
33
19
10
5
Tamilnadu
74
20
4
2
Andhra Pradesh
62
29
4
4
2
Gujarat (Amreli)
44 (34)
44 (51)
7 (8)
4 (4)
1 (2)
Madhya Pradesh
57
25
8
5
5
*Can read**
48
31
10
8
3
Cannot read
65
27
4
3
1
Rajasthan
(Udaipur)
West Bengal
(24 Paraganas)
(Refer Table 5)
*
Slowly or fluently
**
Literacy-based data for 8 states only
D.
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
9
2.2
Occupation
The predominant occupation of the chief wage earner
was farming followed by unskilled labour.
There were some state-wise variations.
In Manipur,
only 40% of all respondents were farmers and only 6%
were unskilled labourers.
$
Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat had 12% - 14%
of village householders who were employed in skilled
labour, against the national average of 9%.
In West Bengal and Manipur,, trade accounted for 16,0
and 13% of the main occupations
2.3
respectively.
Family size and composition
The average family size was 6.0 members.
In nearly 40% of the households, there were elder
members aged 51 years or more while in 25% of the house
holds one or more siblings also lived along with the
married respondent.
Indian Market Research Bureau
10
3-0
COMMUNITY DATA
The main religion followed in all states and dis90% of all state level respon
tricts was Hinduism.
dents and 89% of all tracking districts were Hindus.
1% of all respondents in the states were Muslims while
1% were Christians.
The exceptions to this rule were the Eastern states of
West Bengal and Manipur.
In West Bengal, 23% of all
respondents were Muslims; within West Bengal, in the
tracking district of 24 Paraganas, 33% of all respon
dents followed the Muslim faith.
In Manipur, 43?6 of
all respondents followed the Christian faith.
In the tracking district of Sultanpur (Uttar Pradesh),
10% of all respondents were Muslims.
Scheduled castes and tribes
25% of all respondents belonged to the scheduled caste and
8% were tribal.
tribes.
Of these, 70% belonged to scheduled
Details were as follows :
Indian Market Research Bnrean
11
Base : All respondents
Base
Total
Scheduled tribe
as % of total
Scheduled
Caste
4418
0'
/0
OZ
/O
25
6
(-)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)1353 (604)
29 (38)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
402 (602)
19 (11)
13
(39)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)595 (600)
20 (31)
10
(-)
38
Manipur
16
Tamilnadu
481
25
Andhra Pradesh
609
22
Gujarat (Amreli)
348 (601)
40 (38)
4
Madhya Pradesh
616
21
16
8
There were some interesting variations in the literacy levels
of persons belonging to scheduled castes or tribes as
compared to those who did not belong to these categories.
Scheduled caste
States 4 Districts
Non-Scheduled caste
States 4 Districts
713
2797
1439
%
O'
'0
%
%
Literate
33
38
57
53
Illiterate
67
62
43
47
Base :
1111
Clearly, literacy levels were significantly different (at
99% level of confidence) between members of scheduled castes
as compared to those who did not belong to scheduled castes.
Indian Market Research Bvreao
12
8 States
NonScheduled
Tribal
4 States
Sche
Total
duled
Tribal Tribal
Total
Tribal
Scheduled
Tribal
347
243
35
252
233
0/
zO
?o
?o
%
?0
Literate
29
20
71
20
80
21
Illiterate
30
70
79
80
Base :
Non
scheduled
Tribal
Tribal persons, on the other hand, appeared to have consistently
low levels of literacy, irrespective of whether they belonged
to a scheduled tribe or not.
Indian Market Research Bureau
-t
13
SECTION A :
GENERAL HYGIENE
Some data pertaining to hygiene practices of respondents
was collected in order to understand current hygiene
practices in rural areas as well to obtain an understanding
of the respondents and their personal background.
4.1
PERSONAL HYGIENE PRACTICES
In response to direct questions pertaining to the respon
dent's routine of the previous day, the claimed hygiene
practices emerged as being very correct.
While these may
have been accurately reported, it is important to remember
that the questions, listed below, were an intrusion into
the individuals privacy and respondents could well have
claimed higher "correct" practices than were actually true
since they would not wish to appear in a bad light in
front of city-bred interviewers.
This data is only to
be seen as a stepping stone towards other details of
personal hygiene.
State
District
4418
2407
%
%
Cleaned mouth in any manner
99
100
Took a bath
85
80
Washed hands after defecation
99
100
Washed hands before eating
99
99
Changed into fresh clothes
80
75
Base : All respondents
Yesterday :
D
Q
Indian Market Research Bureau
14
a/
Mouth cleaning practices
The single largest method of cleaning the mouth in villages
This practice was particularly
was by the use of a twig,
prevalent in Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.
The details regarding mouth cleaning practices were as
follows :
High in
State
District
4375
2397
O'
/□
%
Just gargled with water
3
6
Rajasthan & Udaipur
Cleaned with a twig
46
44
Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh,
Madhya Pradesh, Sultanpur
Cleaned with ash
16
13
West Bengal, Tamilnadu,
24 Paraganas
Cleaned with tooth-powder
20
18
Tamilnadu, West Bengal,
Andhra Pradesh
Cleaned with toothpaste
13
14
Manipur
Others
3
4
Base: Those who cleaned
mouth
Usage of toothpowders was reflected in higher proportions
in the upper income literate and younger age groups.
It was interesting to see that women used toothpowder
in
significantly higher proportions than men.
54% of all
men used a twig compared to only 37% women; 24% of the
women used a toothpowder in contrast to only 16?6 of the men.
In the use of toothpaste, however, there were no significant
differences between men and women.
These patterns were also
reflected in the tracking districts.
Indian Market Research Bureau
15
toothpaste, 58%
Of those who used ash, toothpowder or
i
i on the teeth with their
used these products by rubbing them
fingers while 41% used a toothbrush.
a tooth-
In Manipur, 96% of the relevant respondents used
brush as did 91% in Gujarat, (However, these only
constituted 20% of all Gujarat respondents).
As would be expected, toothbrush usage was significantly
higher in upper income, literate, younger and male groups
than in others.
b/
Bathing practices
0f those who reported having had a bath on the previous
day, 54% had used soap while 39% had used only water.
The’respective proportions in the tracking districts were
in
48% and 41% respectively.
Use of soap for bathing was reported by 84% in Manipur, 80%
Tamilnadu.
in Andhra Pradesh, 69% in Gujarat and 68% in
It was reported in greater proportions by upper income
respondents (69%), younger respondents (67?o versus 40% of
those who were over 46 years of age) and by literate respon
dents (64% versus 45% among illiterate respondents)
However, women used soap for bathing more than men did
(57% versus 51%).
Soap usage was also reported by a larger proportion of respondents from Amreli district (Gujarat - 84% and Udaipur in
Rajasthan - 63%).
Bfflm
Indian Market Research Bureau
16
Over half of those who had not had a bath yesterday had
bathed 1-3 days ago. This was reported from states and
from tracking districts. The distribution was as follows :
Last bathing occasion
State
District
Base :
650
479
%
%
Today
13
10
1-3 days ago
56
57
4-7 days ago
23
22
8-15 days ago
5
7
16-30 days ago
31 days or more
Don't know
2
1
2
2
MB
Indian Market Research Boreao
17
4.2
DISPOSAL OF WASTE
4.2.1
Garbage disposal
The use of a pit in which garbage was thrown was mentioned
by 81 ?□ of the respondents in the states and 71% of the
respondents in tracking districts.
These could be a
private garbage pit, common garbage pit, or a manure pit.
Details were as follows :
District
Private garbage pit
55
50
Andhra Pradesh, Uttar
Pradesh, Gujarat, Amreli
Common garbage pit
9
10
Gujarat
Garbage pit (common/
private)
8
5
Tamilnadu, Rajasthan
Manure pit
8
6
West Bengal
80
71
Anywhere within
courtyard
3
5
Manipur, West Bengal
24 paraganas
Anywhere outside
courtyard
10
15
Manipur, West Bengal
RAjasthan, Udaipur
24 Paraganas
2
Sultanpur, 24 Paraganas
Beside/in pond or
river
4.2.2
High in
State
Waste water disposal
The activities that mainly led to generation of waste water
in a house were :
Indian Market Research Bureau
18
Practiced indoors by
State
District
Oz
/O
0/
zO
Washing vessels
81
69
Bathing by any member
74
69
Washing clothes
54
38
Waste water thus generated was let off out onto the
village streets by 33% of the respondents in the states
and fully half of them in the tracking districts,
Details
were as follows :
State
Waste water disposal____
District
High in
3817
1940
%
%
Out on to the road/
street
33
50
Gujarat, Rajasthan, Amreli,
Udaipur
In a roadside drain
25
17
Manipur, Uttar Pradesh,
Sultanpur
Thrown in open,
absorbed, dries
25
29
Rajasthan, West Bengal,
Udaipur, 24 Paraganas
Thrown into plants/
kitchen garden
12
5
Madhya Pradesh
Goes into private
garbage pit
8
4
Goes into private
soak pit
5
8
Accumulates into a cess
pool
4
3
Base:
IM®
Indian Market Research Bureau
19
4.2.3
Animal dung disposal
81% of all respondents in the states and 82% in the
tracking districts possessed domestic animals.
The
lowest proportion of owners were in Manipur and Tamilnadu
(60% and 64% respectively) while the highest proportions
were in Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal (89% and 86%
respectively).
While there were a significantly higher
proportion of owners among upper income households,
ownership of domestic animals did not show any real
differences by age, literacy or sex.
Cows and buffaloes
animals.
were the two most widely possessed
58% of those who owned animals, owned cows
(80% in West Bengal and 81% in Madhya Pradesh).
In the
tracking districts, 60% of animal owners owned cows.
48%
of animal owners in the states owned buffaloes but only
37% did so in the tracking districts.
60% in Andhra
Pradesh and 71% in Gujarat but extremely low in West
Bengal - 9% and Manipur-7%).
69% in the states and 78% in the 4 districts owned other
animals, most probably in addition to cows or buffalloes
or both.
a/
Cow
dung
Cow dung was collected and stored in pits (32%) but
mostly used for other purposes namely as fuel in
the form of dung cakes, as manure and for plastering
of floors and walls.
0Q
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
20
It is interesting to note that only 2% of all respondents
said that cowdung was allowed to lie as is, that nothing
was done to it (Manipur - 13%).
15% said that it was thrown away as garbage (Gujarat 82%,
Tamilnadu 36%).
b/
dung
Buffalo
As with cow dung, 33% collected buffalo
dung and stored it
in a pit.
38% used it for fuel, manure and for plastering of walls
and floors.
22% threw away buffalo
dung as garbage once again. Highest
proportion of this practice was recorded from Gujarat
89% and Tamilnadu 48%.
Opinion on animal dung
Cow dung and buffalo
dung were not believed to be harmful to
health by almost half of all respondents.
On the whole, more
respondents believed that cowdung was harmless, when compared
to buffalo
dung.
BfDW
Indian Market Research Bureau
21
Base : All respondents
Cowdung
State District
Buffalo dung
State District
oz
zO
0/
0/
/0
Oz
zO
Yes, harmful
35
37
37
Not harmful
Don't know
52
50
12
13
Other animal
State District
oz
zO
0/
/O
38
47
53
48
44
35
31
15
18
18
16
Significantly higher proportions of respondents in the upper
income category, those who were literate and men rather than
women believed that all animal dung could be harmful to health.
However, the believers in the potential harmfulness of cowdung
and buffalo dung were in smaller proportion on the whole than
those.who believed in the harmfulness of other animal dung.
WH
Indian Market Research Bureau
22
5.0
EXPOSURE TO MEDIA
Respondents were asked a simple question on whether or
not they had been exposed to various media and to
people who could potentially influence their knowledge,
attitudes and practices.
It must be mentioned here that the objective of
understanding the exposure to media/personnel was only
as a stepping stone to the next question which pertained
to recall of messages received from that source in
connection with
water and sanitation.
Media exposure data therefore is only bare, skeletal
data and cannot be used as a media plan basis since it
gives an idea of absolute exposure but not of the extent
of or depth of exposure to each media,.
With that conditional statement we can move into an
evaluation of the absolute reach of various mass media
and various personnel to the rural people,
Reach in
this case is being defined only as the opportunity to
see/hear that respondents had vis-a-vis various media
without details on frequency, regularity etc.
BWB
Indian Market Research Bureau
0)
(Z<
Q
tr
i
o
■:
i
/
cu
K
>'•
X, .
-- 5X,
/
<r
7J
z-
00
w
H
; i
\p
\
3:
}K
I /z
f
—+----- H
|--------
cn
rt5
/ /
:
CD
x:
CD
CO
CD
o-
4- cx<
0
K/
f... i-------- i--- - -</-{ y Z-- j---------- 4-------- 1
CD
<£'
LO
CD
rr
CD
■■‘n
qq trj <C <fB? X: W
CD
02
fl5
CD
O
<E
C/3
23
T otal
UP
Base: All respon
4418
dents
1353
402
%
MP
WB
Man
TN
AP
595
16
481
609
348
616
%
%
0/
/O
%
%
%
%
%
Radio
65
59
50
70
73
66
81
61
66
TV
38
41
25
33
38
38
28
43
50
Films
43
28
23
49
58
69
72
36
40
School teacher
63
88
83
69
74
90
94
68
Health worker
76
42
11
23
40
31
62
77
86
52
Anganwadi
worker
31
14
45
36
2
48
46
69
7
Handpump
caretaker
28
4
35
33
2
38
52
10
46
Folk media
36
30
15
52
29
49
52
30
22
Govt, officer
31
8
16
30
45
46
62
40
43
None of the
above
7
14
4
2
9
4
1
1
10
i
The details of exposure to media become easier tck appreciate
when studied in the context of demographic variables and the
differences in exposure that emerge along such variables.
We will look at the media that over one-third of the respondents
had been exposed to.
The details were as follows :
Indian Market Research Bureau
Sm
*T5
Jm
0)
o
rd
cu
■4
o;
o
o
3
a
o
□
o-»
o
3
&
k
rd
JhfU
Pi
PL
Om
O
rd
3
5
IX-
%f r
g
rd
(U
□
co
rd
X
C£
V\
•/ I
IM
i
-i
CP
I’
x:
'!
0?!
i
K
PL,
j
<L.
I
:
-- X
L-<
M
z:
pp
Z3^
•'’j
n?
PC
y* 4"
Z5
i
cd
------- 1-rX>
<0
S)
cn
>"
CX)
LD
P£ 0-4 <11
cn
TT
W
{2
c:
00
24
Radio
TV
Films
School
teacher
Health
worker
Folk
media
61
33
40
73
41
34
73
47
49
86
43
41
82
63
58
83
47
40
15 - 25 years
69
43
55
78
43
39
26 - 45 years
63
35
39
76
42
34
46 + years
59
36
33
70
42
36
Literate
78
51
58
85
48
45
Illiterate
52
25
30
68
37
26
Men
75
45
53
81
47
46
Women
54
30
33
71
38
25
(?o across)
Income
Below Rs 750
751
1500
Rs 1501+
Age
Literacy
Sex
As a general principle, it would appear that a high income
and high exposure to all media were very strongly correlated.
The exceptions were the school teacher and folk media.
Exposure to media did not appear to be heavily dependent on
age although TV and films were reportedly seen by a greater
proportion of younger people than grownups.
Literacy and being born male seemed to certainly guarantee
high exposure to various media.
Indian Market Research Bureau
o
IT
a?<
G
‘d
S’;
I
I
‘D
O
C\.
'*■'*
.•Tl vk«>
.r:
Vm *j.~»
a?
O '<<-> <<
••V
.il -
0
o
Cu
0
Q
rC
0)
a:* 53
0 -
Q
ZT7 J-n.
C/3
r~ i
w
I
£
mOsSO
^1
J
f- !<»
Si rf/.l
: ’XI ‘
f. ~
<c
>—<
U^J
M
r:
r>3
co
gwo
<C ,-
r:
<2
xfT^
o
U3
c^
rd
b®W<f----------- 1------in
sX3
C5Ci
LT)
U)
..... ■■-•]------- -+---------------------- +-------• ”
co
■’7*
iD
cj lji
<r
□ mJ W
cn
25
Messages received about water
a/
and sanitation
Radio
Of those who had been exposed to the radio, the
following proportions said that they had received
messages related to water and sanitation from the
radio.
High in
State
District
2858
1306
0'
O'
/□
/□
Water supply
62
65
Manipur - 82%
Madhya Pradesh - 74%
Tamilnadu - 72%
Water storage
61
64
Manipur - 78%
Tamilnadu - 70%
Madhya Pradesh - 72%
Water purification
62
65
West Bengal - 72%
Manipur - 72%
Tamilnadu - 74%
Madhya Pradesh - 77%
Waste disposal
49
51
Manipur - 75%
Tamilnadu - 61%
Madhya Pradesh - 64%
Household hygiene
56
56
Manipur - 76%
Tamilnadu - 68%
Madhya Pradesh - 66%
Base :
The largest proportion of radio listeners who recalled
such messages were found in Manipur, Tamilnadu, Madhya
Pradesh and sometimes, West Bengal.
The upper income, older age group and literate respon
dents consistently reported greater recall of such messages,
than others.
It was interesting however that women rather
than men registered greater recall of each issue.
BIB 0
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
26
b/ Television
Of those who had been exposed to television the following
proportions recalled having heard and seen the different
messages on TV.
State
District
1666
689
?0
%
Water supply
45
43
Water storage
45
45
Water purification
44
44
Waste disposal
38
36
Household hygiene
42
40
Base :
The highest proportion of positive responses were obtained
from four states :
- Madhya Pradesh (where 65% - 70% respondents recalled
water related messages and 58-60% recalled sanitation
related messages), Rajasthan (including Odaipur), Gujarat
and Manipur.
While Rajasthan's high recall was also
reflected in the data gathered for
Udaipur district,
the high Gujarat recall was not equally reflected in
Amreli
district.
As with radio messages, recall was high among upper income,
older and literate respondents.
Once again, recall among
women was higher than that among men.
In fact, water
related messages from TV were recalled by 52% to 53% of all
women who
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
27
had exposure to TV as compared to approximately 40% of the
men.
Messages on waste disposal were recalled by 47% women
compared to 32% men and messages on household hygiene were
recalled by 52% women compared to 36% men.
This was true
and state and district levels.
c/.
Films
The following message recall from films was reported by those
who had any exposure to films.
Base :
State
District
1913
714
0'
%
/O
Water supply
43
40
Water storage
42
41
Water purification
42
41
Waste disposal
36
37
Household hygiene
40
40
The state from which high recall was mentioned was Madhya
Pradesh. Manipur recorded the lowest recall (below 20%)
followed by West Bengal and, on some issues, Rajasthan and
Andhra Pradesh.
In demographic terms, the profile remained similar to the
earlier ones with women still registering a higher recall
than men.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
si
o
i.ii
Si*
LT;
7
E5
d
LiJ
?r
o
<
ir-
p
LX
PL!
[■
>»*4
l»- ‘ :-' -4
IJ-
I
I
I
,(Z)
i_d
M
I
■
o
a
©
■'- co
tvS.
W
!
co
J
Cs]
I
^3
(/]
ft
1<
I
I
b._
»
<
I
r.
i
r
i
j
■-.'-J
v« >.-*** JOar * •*
O
>_.-XtEl£JK- .TV.*
I
(I
“XI
—1 i
■;?' I
i
!
fe “ZTrl
E si
K
'LLJ
j
j
jj
h-
x.
iyj
5:
o*
fcu<
>x
t'.
.:x.
■T.
<r
:x'
o
■57
r.''
t:.
<1:
y- LrJ
?’?
< < -;j
, -,•”----.* <?
------K*>
_ ..
~r -««£■
X>
o
<r
o
•:i:
•U
CO
IT
p:;
'*T.W
J.-IV
&
3
<-7“
•u
O
t <•
I
,
___ ,.J._|.J . .... -I -
&r;i
jx
U4
'J
i
J
!i1
hu!} . . ~”1
T-<
G7;r<- ’<?
<
<r
o
28
d/
Others
On an average, 22% of respondents at
School Teacher
the state level and 21% at the district level said that
they had received messages related to water and sanitation
from the school teacher.
In the districts, sanitation
messages were only reported by 18-20% of the respondents.
The school teacher appeared to be playing a strong
communications role in Manipur, and, to a lesser extent
in Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Tamilnadu and West Bengal.
The demographic profile of those who reported having received
messages from the school teacher was different from the
earlier ones. While these respondents were also upper
income and literate, they tended to be younger. The proportion
of male respondents who had heard from the school teacher
was higher, at both state and district levels.
Health worker
:
33% to 36% of respondents at the state
level and similar proportions
at the district level had heard
these messages from the health worker.
The highest mention of health worker as a source came from
Gujarat, Madhya
Pradesh and Manipur.
Respondents from
upper income groups and literate respondents expressed
higher recall of these messages from health workers.
also tended to be younger.
They
Men reported higher recall than
women.
Anganwadi worker
:
19-20% of the respondents who had been
exposed to anganwadi workers in the states and 15% to 17/o
in the districts recalled having received any messages related
to water and sanitation from these respondents.
D.
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
29
from anganwadi
There was high mention of such messages
workers in Madhya Pradesh (54% regarding water storage,
water purification,
38% regarding water supply, 49/o regarding
42% regarding household hygiene).
reported higher recall of
Contrary to expectations, men
workers even though women
such messages from anganwadi
to anganwadi workers.
had, in absolute terms, higher exposure
Folk media did not appear
to be an important source of such
12% stating this medium as a
messages with only around
sanitation related messages. Highest
source of water and
Manipur and Madhya
proportions were again mentioned from
Pradesh.
This medium was mentioned by a
smaller proportion of upper
income respondents; there were no
real differences by age,
literacy or sex.
Government officers were
a source of these messages for
about 26% of respondents in the state who had any
officers and around 22% of the
interaction with government
respondents in
in the
the districts.
districts. Higher proportions of respon
dents from Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Manipur spoke o
having heard of these issues from government officers.
While there seemed to be no pattern of recall by
age,
it was the older, literate male who spoke of having
received such messages from government officers.
0)
K
Indian Market Research Bureau
B
WATER
D.
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
30
1.0
PRACTICES
1.1
Practices with regard to collection
1.1.1
Purpose for which water is collected
92% of women across the 8 states and 89% across the
four districts brought water home for drinking purposes.
This constituted the single most important reason for
which.water was collected and brought home.
for
other
Water
reasons was brought home by smaller
proportion of respondent households.
Water for cooking purposes emerged as a very close second
with 91% of respondents in the 8 states and 88% in the 4
districts bringing water home for this purpose.
Thus, with
very few exceptions, when water was collected for drinking
purposes, it was also collected for cooking purposes.
It would be useful to look at the purposes for which
water was collected on the whole and also across the 8
states and 4 districts.
Base : All respondents 8 state average
4 state average
24
% who collected
Sultan Udai- Parag- Amand brought
reli
anas
pur
pur
water home
Purposes
82
87
98
88
92
Drinking
82
84
98
88
91
Cooking
Washing vessels
77
66
97
5
76
Washing clothes
50
35
35
2
40
Bathing (men)
Bathing (women)
Bathing (children)
Animal drinking
48
63
50
50
15
72
31
53
29
47
53
17
1
1
21
47
75
76
66
40
(Refer Table 1 - Water)
MH
J
Indian Market Research Bureau
31
The issue that causes concern is that in half of all house
holds, water was collected and brought home for purposes such
as bathing and for animals to drink, activities that involve
large volumes of water and some that could conceivably be
performed at the water source itself.
Two states where water for bathing was brought into the
house by over 85?i of the households (74% for children's bath)
were Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat.
Water for washing vessels was carried home in over 80% of the
households in all states except Manipur (74%) and West
Bengal (18%).
In Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat, water for
vessels was carried home in over 90% of the households.
In fact, West Bengal is a conspicous exception to the rule in
that, other than drinking and cooking water which was brought
home by 82% and 80% of the households respectively,
water was not carried home by more than 20% of households for
any other reason.
The details offer interesting contrasts.
Base : All respondents
8 states
West
Bengal
Andhra
Pradesh
Gujarat
Drinking
92
81
94
90
Cooking
91
80
94
90
Washing vessels
77
18
92
91
Washing clothes
50
7
55
66
Bathing men
48
3
85
88
Bathing women
63
5
90
86
Bathing children
50
20
75
74
Animal drinking
50
57
54
32
Purpose
(Refer Table 1 - Water)
IM D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
i
i
i
i
rri
C
•"‘5
'^1
rt
<5^
it;
<Zl..t
2L'
CC
cz
C'-wJ
!
ZZ
i
i
fzZ
'I’Ss
i
Illi
k. Jjv i
i
I
&
3
V
niiwiiiiiiiiiiiiiiHiiiniii^ z5
rZ?,
r'“’d
te
o
Ij.^-
9>
0)
IZ
!
Ll-
LO
Ld
CO
IM
<-?
LwiuiMmri'i .nmrjw-m--™*
CJ
rx
o
co
w
Z)
O
<r
z:
x
«r
r
tfrnifLuuXu
bJ
ffiw
in
tr
id
lx.
Lx
£
Ll-
Q
LjJ
r----------
I
O
J/
<
t/}
5
ia
WiWwWWiM®’
<y
3
i
i
J
EZ
i
i
..... -i--------------- 1—
i
<s:
cr?
r-
CS
uX.
u I
U 1
CX M OfZ O
<r cs t-J
Cd
co
4
CE
<=>
I
I
I
-r-_5
I
I
I
I
)
I
^-4
uX*;
re-
Q
<E
>X
□
[II?
c?
282 S
--------- r
\
J
/
'"'I
i
!»
laJ
o
j
<
<v
rt>
I
L. .■
I
I
LG
Ld
Q
i
;O
I
C/?
i
(X
tx
o
•>j
tn
^Ld
er
iI ..
cc
x:
Ct
Ld
Lj_.
>
j
££
oI
Ld
£
J
!•
I
«W!W»*«* i
r^
0;
c«o
tn
Z3
j
i
I----------- H----k_o
-- "d
S?
------ 1,.•X
Ij J
jX, PJ ££ c> r-U 2£ iH
<r ■ j> w
z:
32
1.1.2
Sources of water
When sources are looked at in entirety, the two major
water sources in rural areas emerge as being the handpump
and the dugwell.
However, there were differences between states on the subject
of the most important source (overall) as well as the most
We will examine both aspects separately.
important sources by use.
Base
: All respondents
24P
TN
AP
Guj
MP
Sul
Uda
5
21
12
19
20
22
12
22
28
12
33
40
21
26
41
57
27
58
45
17
54
52
40
46
63
69
49
12
30
1
7
3
4
6
4
21
Public handpump
26
12
22
55
3
23
39
15
26
18
Handpump (Total)’
38
42
23
62
3
26
43
21
30
Private tap
7
3
19
2
7
2
20
Public tap
8
3
8
1
18
24
12
Tap (Total)
15
6
27
1
20
31
Stream/River
6
2
9
2
58
Lake/Pond
18
4
21- 46
38
Canal
3
Meeh Tubewell (Pvt)
3
Meeh Tubewell (Pub)
Meeh Tubewell (Total)
WB
Total
UP
Private dugwell
19
26
17
Public dugwell
28
32
Dugwell (Total)
47
Private handpump
Man
Amr
Sources
14
36
54
74
13
39
54
88
49
14
1
6
20
5
3
14
40
19
4
4
4
6
22
8
20
19
4
2
7
1
2
22
1
2
1
8
6
5
2
10
28
1
10
2
16
6
2
26
3
19
2
14
24
4
11
59
1
2
6
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
6
1
7
3
1
2
1
3
1
DJ
Indian Market Research Bureau
The statewise patterns are fairly clear.
Dugwell emerges
as the mam source in Uttar Pradesh, Tamilnadu and Andhra
Pradesh. In Udaipur (Rajasthan) the dugwell was very
important; it was also important in the state as a whole.
The handpump was important in West Bengal; in the 24 Paraganas
district it emerged as the single most important source by
far.
Taps were important water sources in Gujarat, Tamilnadu and
Rajasthan.
In the tracking district of Amreli (Gujarat)
taps emerged as an important water source.
In Manipur, streams and ponds were clearly very important
water sources. These were also fairly important in Madhya
Pradesh.
Lakes and ponds were also important water sources in West
Bengal and Rajasthan.
Finally, the mechanized tubewell
(particularly the private
mechanised tubewell) was an important source of water in
Tamilnadu.
1.1.3
Purposes by sources
An analysis of the sources used by each purpose provides an
insight into the water usage patterns across the states.
Data for the 4 tracking districts will be highlighted where
relevant.
Indian Market Research Bureau
j""
I
£.
il)
‘■^
c:
OJ
r/i
.c?
%
■T^
Cl<
I
i
>
£
rtf
&
'*•
Q)
3
-C*
£T)
i
Gj
Cj
s<
rX
CO
-J
<u
xz f-
Em (11
□
(IB
vti
i\r.
“n
f’-
j ®
GJ
t 3
<tf
to
P 02
inm^
czz±
^-4
jq
•t
O
HU lit!
to
03
4: E
‘------ ’T' }:?”v;r!^v
+> o
t
m
L_^_-
tn
i=
•rM
Q)
:**m 7***
□£
........................................................ ■■•“-”
rt?
<>-X\%-fn^-i iXl
'"
L
{.J
mg X«
ilka#
<
[ZZZ Oj
02
<f) -p
it o
to
5=
HI
t/}
LiJ
QJ
t
LQ
23
■m
aw
EfiJ
limn tns
i-----a*
o
o
^^Ss^>^lM^w^lSi2^^^®aE^E^ESS2SShJwiKs««™i«a'M!*a^ o
iimi .
r;
sM
OD
(‘Xi
£L< jLc,i fX
•
v
tx
•«...
-
1-
<x <-#
uT?
1J '<-
—r/?’T*’r
C£)
02
0 W
it w
.:^ co i—* ■JEL
GO
z>
v2
34
The following table provides an overview of the main sources
used for various purposes :
Base :
All respondents in 8 states
(?o across)
Sources
Mechanised
Canal Tubewell
Tap
Stream/
River
Lake/
Pond
38
15
6
18
40
34
15
2
3
3
Cooking
40
31
15
2
6
3
Washing vessels
38
28
14
2
3
1
3
Washing clothes
32
22
12
5
8
2
4
Bathing - men
35
23
13
4
6
2
4
Bathing - women
35
24
13
3
6
1
4
Bathing - children
35
24
13
3
6
1
4
Animal drinking
35
23
10
5
14
2
3
Dug
well
Hand
pump
Overall
47
Drinking
Purposes :
3
5
It is interesting to note that :
o
once a non-traditional water source was used, it was used
for a large variety of purposes.
o
where a dugwell was used.again, the use was fairly consistent
o
the dugwell, handpump and tap, in that order formed the
predominant sources of drinking water.
Indian Market Research Bureau
35
1.2
Water sources - Distance
The majority of public water sources (75%) were within
5 minutes walking distance from the house, as reported
by respondents and, where possible, verified by
interviewers.
The distances at which public water sources were located
Details were as follows :
varied between states.
(Base : For each source = those who mentioned use of that
source)
Public source
Total
WB
UP
Man
TN
AP
Guj
MP
155
234
67
158
%
%
%
%
Dugwell
1191 422
83
71
%
%
%
%
Less than 100 mtrs
68
81
42
95
58
54
44
78
500 mtrs
25
16
45
4
29
36
42
20
6
3
12
10
9
14
2
131
83
242
39
170
178
226
95
1115
145
79
329
112
238
51
160
Less than 100 mtrs
75
91
80
87
51
61
77
69
501+ mtrs
4
1
3
1
8
8
1
6
105
58
89
64
182
158
75
114
363
38
32
8
3
114
71
68
30
%
%
O'
/O
%
%
%
%
%
%
Less than 100 mtrs
74
68
57
38
69
75
85
69
93
500 mtrs
21
32
42
29
19
15
14
26
8
1
33
11
6
2
1
116
458
156
109
70
85
Base
101
501+ mtrs
Average (mtrs)
%
Handpump
Base :
Average (mtrs)
Tap
Base
101
501+ mtrs
3
Average (mtrs)
99
93
48
Indian Market Research Bureau
36
Taps and handpumps were clearly available closer to the
house than traditional dugwells.
There were some
exceptional states.
In West Bengal, taps, where available were far away
but handpumps were close.
were closer
In Rajasthan too, handpumps
than either dugwells or taps.
In Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, taps were closer
than either handpumps or dugwells.
Rivers and streams where used, were an average of 285 metres
away from the house of the respondent^ranging from a low
average of 146 metres in Manipur to a high of 635 metres
in Gujarat.
Lakes or ponds, where used, were usually located closer
to the respondent, at an average distance of 156 metres.
The range was wide, from a low of 40 metres in West
Bengal to a high of over 450 metres in Madhya Pradesh.
Canal usage was reported mainly in Rajasthan where it
was located at an average of distance of 307 metres, In other
states, the one or two respondents who did use canals
had them at an average distance of 15-65 metres from
their house.
frequency of visit to source
On an average, respondents reported that the source of
water was visited 8-9 times in a day^
Indian Market Research Bureau
37
The lowest number of visits were reported from West Bengal
(mode : 1-2 times)
while the highest were
reported from
Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh (mode : over 16 times).
In Tamilnadu, there were wide variations,
23% reported
going 3-4 times to collect water, 21% going 5-6 times
and 22% going 9-10 times.
There were variations in frequency of water collected by
The average frequency by different sources were as
state.
follows :
Average frequency of visit
Dugwell
12.6 times
Handpump
9.1 times
Tap
9.0 times
River/stream
6.4 times
Lake/Pond
6.4 times
Canal
6.2 times
Mechanized tubewell
9.1 times
(Refer Table 4a Water)
Rivers, lakes and canals were visited less frequently
than other locations.
One possible reason for this could
be that rivers and lake/ponds were located further away
than the other sources.
Assuming a walking speed of 1.5 kms an hour (25 metres a
minute), the distance of water source has been converted
into time to estimate total time taken over a day by the
main water collector for the job of collecting water.
This
is given below :
Indian Market Research Bureau
38
(a)
(minutes)
Time taken
(one way)
(b)
(No. of times)
F requency
Total time/day
(a X 2 X b)
Source
Dugwell
5.2
12.6
2.2 hrs
Handpump
4.2
9.1
1.3 hrs
Tap
4.0
9.0
1.2 hrs
River/stream
11.4
6.4
2.4 hrs
Lake/Pond
6.2
6.4
1.3 hrs
Canal
9.4
6.2
1.9 hrs
Mechanized tubewell
11.7
9.1
3.5 hrs
The rural person spends more than an hour everyday just
walking to the source of water and back, if that person has
access to and uses a handpump or tap.
If however, the
person uses a river or dugwell, this walking time could
easily be over two hours.
It must be noted that the time
being discussed here does not include time spent in
actually collecting the water, preparation prior to
collection and waiting time at each visit.
If we allow for
just 10 minutes per visit for preparation, collection and
waiting, this time would increase from 1 hour (if river/
lake/canal being used) to over two hours if dugwells are
used.
10 minutes is a low estimate - the actual time could
be considerably higher and vary, depending upon the
circumstances.
In the four tracking districts being studied, the main water
sources were as follows :
Indian Market Research Bureau
39
Sultanpur
Udaipur
Base : All respondents
%
%
Dugwell
63
69
Handpump
39
54
88
49
Tap
4
4
2
26
Stream/River
3
19
2
14
Lake/Pond
4
11
59
1
Canal
1
1
1
1
Mechanized tubewell
1
3
1
Amreli
24 Paraganas
%
0/
/0
48
While the dugwell was the most important source in Sultanpur
and Udaipur the handpump and lake were important sources in
24 Paraganas district,
In Amreli both dugwell and handpump
were important sources.
The average distances for each of these sources were as
follows :
Base : Those who used each source
Sultanpur
Udaipur
Dugwell
100
300
Handpump
100
100
Tap
50
River/Stream
100
24 Paraganas
Amreli
(Metres)
150
300
100
200
100
200
20
200
Indian Market Research Bureau
40
The frequency with which each of these sources were visited
was as follows :
Sultanpur
Udaipur
Dugwell
20
4
2
5
Handpump
17
4
4
7
Tap
16
2
7
River/Stream
10
6
6
24 Paraganas
Amreli
(No. of times)
2
Going by the earlier mentioned conversion rate based on 25
metres per minute, we arrive at the following time/source/day
for the 4 districts
Sultanpur
Udaipur
Dugwell
2.7
1.6
Handpump
2.3
0.5
Tap
1.1
River/stream
1.3
24 Parganas
Amreli
(hours)
0.4
2.0
0.5
1.9
0.3
1.9
0.1
1.6
The respondents of Sultanpur clearly spent far more time
on water collection than their counterparts in other districts,
primarily because of the high reported frequency of their
visits.
Conversely, respondents in Amreli had water sources
located at a greater distance but, because of relatively low
collections frequencies, spent between 1.5-2 hours walking
to the water source and back.
In Udaipur and 24 Parganas, on the other hand, both proximity
and low frequency of visit ensured that, on an average, less
than one hour walking time per day was spent on this activity.
Indian Market Research Bureau
41
1.3
Collection Practices
1.3.1
Containers used for collecting water
Pots and buckets were used to collect water, with pots
being used somewhat more commonly than buckets (67%
versus 55%)
There were clear statewise trends on this issue which
are depicted below.
Base : All respondents
(% across)
Pots
Buckets
Other
None
Total
67
54
17
2
Uttar Pradesh
(Sultanpur)
22
(7)
95
(97)
9
(1)
1
(-)
Rajasthan (Udaipur) 91
(93)
50
(16)
28
(46)
1
(-)
West Bengal
(24 Paraganas)
75
(81)
70
(69)
21
(15)
6
(4)
Manipur
44
65
43
1
Tamilnadu
92
11
34
1
Andhra Pradesh
96
10
6
1
Gujarat
99
Madhya Pradesh
81
(100)
36
37
(16)
25
(16)
(-0
1
12
2
* Figures in brackets pertain to tracking districts.
The use of buckets was particularly high in Uttar Pradesh.
In West Bengal, buckets and pots were used almost equally
while in the other states, pots were used more than buckets.
Indian Market Research Bureau
42
In terms of sole usage of one container or multiple
usages, details were as follows
(Base : All)
?0
Highest in
Used pots only
36
Andhra Pradesh
: 85%
Used buckets only
25
Uttar Pradesh
: 71%
Other containers only
2
Manipur & Tamil Nadu :
Pots + buckets
21
West Bengal
: 48%
Pots + other containers
7
Tamilnadu
: 25%
Buckets + other containers
4
Manipur
: 30%
4
Gujarat
: 12%
6% each
Pots + buckets + Other
containers
The average capacity of a pot was reported at 14.2 litres, of
a bucket at 10.8 litres and of other containers at 17 litres.
On an average, respondents filled 9.3 pots of water in a day,
15.9 buckets and 6.3 other containers.
The overall picture was therefore as follows :
Average Capacity
(litres)
Numbers filled
Pots
14.2
9.3
Buckets
10.8
15.9
Others
17.0
6.3
Indian Market Research Bureau
o
co
Pa
12
lA
vO
CX
Oft
(M
3
a?
LlJ
a
CO 04
CD
N
•H
CD
u
bJ
_Jn
,-J-O
uj
g
r
E
rV-
cu
O 1J
4"
—
2:
H
5r-H
0)
CD
CO
lat
f-4
rr <
CD
bJ O
CD
.CO
o
< V£
> n
<r
CO
re
o
> LxJ
Li_
C
co
"O
c
Ej
CD
0)
-X
bJ 5
ZE
co
u
? bJ
-
133
•m i
CJ
VO
JO
c
Zj IT;
ZZJ
O
CD
CD
?■
□
nl
CD
bJ
n
kJ
<
bJ
>
O\ ‘si“-1
i
rT
I
I
(■'—4
• rr*
■'
—i-—
i----------
£55
tTJ
o
:r^
------ 4--------
T5D
in
LT)
0“/
^•0^-0 52
2
-FU3
43
filled by each respondent
(data pertained
The actual volumes
to water collected on
multiplying capacity
the previous day) were calculated by
of container into number of containers
arrived at revealed that on an average,
filled. The data thus
litres of water per day. There
a rural household collects 192
variations which are given below :
were state - wise
Average volume/day (litres)
State
(Overall) 192
Uttar Pradesh
256
Rajasthan
118
West Bengal
132
Manipur
80
Tamil Nadu
176
Andhra Pradesh
225
Gujarat
120
Madhya Pradesh
184
Respondents from Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh collected
the highest volumes of water while those in Manipur collected
the lowest volumes,
Volumes collected would be a function of
the purposes tor which water is brought into the house and
the availability of a general water source close - by.
Indian Market Research Bureau
44
1.3.2
Water collectors
The main water collectors were women.
In fact, the
young - woman, aged 15-35 years was the single most
commonly mentioned water collector.
In fact, when questions were asked for the "main” and
the other collector, this young woman was mentioned
in 12% of all cases as both the main and the other
collector. Thus, in 12% of all households there was
nobody else who collected water other than the young
woman.
Data regarding the main or sole collector of water by
state, is as follows :
i
Indian Market Research Bureau
WHO COLLECTS WATER FOR HOUSEHOLD
14.1 47.
!■
BL
/Bq. -4—4—P4IL
t
•3
<xxxX>:xxxx>:vxK
/«O pwm
L'x'LHHi
6 -.< >. >■. >1 X
x.X.z\,\a;<xx./...x./x;/
5T-r*Xi
WlBMWWStWW
35.86-/.
i k3 Vlomen
’
j 'E§ Men
i
J
Data, regarding the main or sole collector of water by state, is given below:
Main or sole water collector
(Base : All who collect water = 4291)
(% across)
Men
Women
f
I
I
I
(Age)
15-35
36-50
51 +
/
Total
63
16
2
1
15
15-35
36-50
10
3
51 +
Uttar Pradesh
3
48
19
1
2
21
5
1
(Sultanpur)
6
54
13
1
2
17
5
1
Rajasthan
4
71
16
1
4
2
(Udaipur)
3
74
15
6
2
West Bengal
4
74
13
1
1
3
1
(24Parganas)
7
65
9
4
2
2
Manipur
2
87
8
2
1
1
Tamil Nadu
3
66
21
5
1
2
•i
Andhra Pradesh
5
59
14
2
3
10
4
Gujarat
2
79
13
2
3
1
(Amreli)
3
83
12
1
5
72
14
2
Madhya
Pradesh
1
5
1
1
4>
w
J-‘
(S
U7
ro
U7
I/?
QJ
‘Zn
<r>
<r
ga
14.41
>
4-
0?
un
OJ
^77
0)
CT
<T
N
TT
*4?
<)
- '•' «4' •• ■--'■
■ ,
;:S
w
- -1
w
4«ll: —f-—"
kq
tl 41 I
0
§
k g
Q
•rr
(VJ
A FW8?
ill
JI
Fff
fc I "
........ . .
kq
a?
81
Ji
.L
.C^
:2K?
^Wl ''S^ •*' U‘ * ‘
Jill ttv' ’} ‘
li
•—..-.q.»1 - •A’
■*
.< w .. •• • » m a* >• ■•
*<
, -
!»H!
.i ;« m, rs M
I **
-1-
/ >ss.£
h
/:....’ -^<.1
A, ><!./.
’•.
S. : /s/.'F--/
: n«.;•*
1 /• ’£’’'>■>
/
,•■
F
A
----------
• •
JVA*A<-‘-;>'A
A. ~LL
L.....
/<'
•■ ■■-. yr< ■ • - 41-.
8! :’’
«S5
SI Z
/jv. . :< ..<?;<<-•
£'iAU.iP
s®
4«‘y
^/:f*s-
4-..v .; .
x-m;c.’.'
^';:s
••> ^£1:: •A
***‘vzAJ/z. i^<ft
iN
C’-J
r
r-’ ALll--
•. ■■'•>. -■•. ••■ •
-• -•F-
vD
<0
a
•m ■ miA < w
/■: /- :>;;b
/
■*'
.» *• —
Jta
£
' ±: ::|i
=
'
fl" I
■ M V ■ M IS -* I
::::::::
’W* T
§
iiX
fflHL
4ml
w M E* Ml r« Ml
■LTj
E1*-*
ri
,3c.4, I^*-* — a*
L>‘'
s?
Ft
‘t'
J
F
81
¥
>
</i
X
LO
it;
C£>
LD
LG
’..G
co
I
I
CO
iLs
6J
<Z
<r
<x
Eq
SB
o £
'
e:
£
f
.<
co
<5J
CO
¥.?*/< L< ^-L.-fe’ t
t.q
o
o
Cm
•+
in
Oj
<£
<X
46
The table establishes clearly that water collection
was clearly seen to be a woman's job.
This is evident
not only from the fact that 85% of all main or sole water
collectors were women but also from that fact that, in all
states, the girl child was often the main water collector
but the boy child rarely so (in Gujarat and Rajasthan, not
at all !)• Similarly, women above 51 collected water more
often than men above 51.
The implications cause concern. When a family presumably
does not have a woman aged 15-50 who can collect water, the
second choice may be the
UP and AP).
young boy aged 15-35.
(mostly .in
However, in most states, the girl child aged
less than 15 years would be as likely to become the main
water collector as any male member of the household !
The other water collector in the house (who would presumably
help out in case of illness, emergency or special circumstances)
was often the young man of the household aged 15-35 years.
Details are given below :
(Base : All respondents = 4291)
Girl Child 5-15 Yrs
Sole
Main
Other
Total
0/
/O
O'
zO
O'
zO
OZ
zO
1
3
15
19
0.23
Woman
15-55 Yrs
12..
51
13
76
.1.50
Woman
35-50 Yrs
1
16
17
34
0.50
Woman
514-
Yrs
2
7
9
0.10
Yrs
1
11
12
0.14
7
27
37
0.49
3
12
15
0.17
3
3
0.04
Boy Child
Man
15-35 Yrs
Man
36-50 Yrs
Man
51 +
Yrs
3
* Sole = 3, Main = 2, Other - 1, Not mentioned
Weighted average*
0
Indian Market Research Bureau
47
The young woman was three times more important a water
collector than the next person who was the middle aged
woman followed closely by the young man. The girl child
was one and a half times more used for this task, than a
boy of the same age.
Even in the relatively older aged, the
woman collected water more than the man.
1.3.3. Problems regarding water collection
Two out of three female respondents said that there were
problems with regard to water collection.
62% of
On the whole,
the respondents replied positively to this guestion
regarding problems.
The highest proportion of positive
responses were received from Rajasthan (71%) and the lowest
from Manipur (47%) and Madhya Pradesh (48%).
There were
significantly more complaints regarding water collection
problems from the lower income household (65% as against
39% in upper income households) and from those who were
illiterate (68%).
Since these two factors do appear to
be interrelated, it would appear that low incomes resulted
in less convenient water sources.
The types of problems mentioned were as follows:
(Base : Those who said there were problems = 2720)
(%)
Total
Female
kl
48
LI
39
35
39
Body ache and pain
38
Male
27
Tiring work
34
34
34
34
36
25
Dugwell too far
17
18
15
17
16
5
Waiting time HP
13
15
11
13
12
20
HP located too far
12
13
11
11
11
14
Location too far
6
6
5
5
6
8
5
5
5
5
5
8
Water source weak/
dries up
Indian Market Research Bureau
48
It is interesting that the main complaint from women
pertained to
body ache and pain and that women
complained less than men about distance and waiting
time at the handpump.
While there is no direct data
to support this, we believe that the woman did not
object to the time and distance as this task of water
collection
provided her with an oppor
tunity to move out of the house and socialize,
To
carry the thought further, men could have thought of
time and distance as a problem for the same reason i.e.,
it kept women out of the house and ate into time that
could otherwise have been used for other household work
or childcare.
On the other hand,men did not complain
about aches and pains being a problem with water colle
ction.
Very few respondents from the UI households complained
about the dugwell being located too far away, indicating
possibly some preference towards UI households/ localities
in the location of public dugwells.
Secondly, UI house
holds would also tend to have and use private dugwells.
Indian Market Research Bureau
11IXXL
cu
nffiB
luZ:
mni
!!!!!!
<ti
!!!H!
UUW
JSJl
c^
fXi
J=
&
w
<r
£m
oo
I
a*
3:
HfcaiSi
r
KO
Q X
Cm
ZD
L_J
H'rr1-
CSD
CO
----- 1--------- 1-
----- 4-----
1-
33
(SD
O-
CH
•JD
Cu,
33
-------- j------------
®
CO
o m r h <c o u:
3D
Cm
3D
49
1.4.
Rain Water
1.4.1.Collection and_use of rain water.
did not collect rain
The majority of respondents
essentially from 2 stateswater. Those who did came
follows :
Manipur and Gujarat. Details were as
(Base : All
4418 )
%
who collected rain
w a t e r________ ___
2407
Total States (4 districts)
18
(28)
3
(11)
*
UP (Sultanpur)
24
(14)
*
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
W Bengal (24 Parganas)
15
(27)
*
Manipur
61
Tamil Nadu
25
Andhra Pradesh
17
Gujarat (Amreli)
74
Madhya Pradesh
14
(60)
*
The tracking districts
did not accurately reflect state-wide behaviour on
this score. In
In Udaipur
Udaipur and
and Amreli,
Amreli, significantly
smaller proportions
proportions of
of people
people collected rain water than
the Rajasthan and Gujarat averages, respectively. In the
24 Parganas and Sultanpur, significantly larger proport
ions than state averages collected rain water.
*
State and tracking district differences significant
at 99?S level of cofidence.
BMW
Indian Market Research Bureau
50
were more likely
On the whole, the younger, literate persons
older and illiterate persons. In
to collect rain water than
trend that showed a greater
the districts, there was a clear
houses (41%
tendency to collect rain water in upper income
in Rs 750 + MHI versus 23% in below Rs 750 MHI). However,
this trend was not borne out in the state
level data.
In both state and district levels, female respondents said
that they collected rain water significantly more often
than male respondents (99% level of confidence).
mean
1.4.2
This could
that men were sometimes unaware of this practice.
Uses of collected rain water
Rain water thus collected was used mainly for washing purposes.
One-third of the respondents used rain water for drinking and
cooking; the others did not use it for drinking but used it
mainly for bathing and washing vessels.
BW D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
51
The details of those who used rain water for drinking
and cooking purposes was as follows:
Base :
those who collected rain water
798
States
Districts =
671
Drinking
Cooking
%
%
Total
34
Uttar Pradesh(Sultanpur)20
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
72
W.Bengal (24 Parganas)
30
84
Manipur
31
12
32
Tamil Nadu
Andhra Pradesh
Gujarat (Amreli)
Madhya Pradesh
(6)
8
(3)
(24)
(16)
71
(21)
24
(44)
81
41
(34)
35
10
33
28
(27)
In both state and district samples, illiterate respon
dents used rain water for dri’nking/cooking purposes
more often than literate respondents. There were however
no real trends or differences in usage by income or age
groups.
The main reasons for not drinking rain water pertained
to its appearance - respondents said that the water was
muddy, unclear, had suspended imp.urj.ties and was impure.
r
V
/¥#
o (
EM
e-\3o
BWB
Indian Market Research Bureau
52
The other reasons, mentioned by small proportions (8% and
4% respectively)
pertained to taste.
Respondents in Gujarat,
Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan said that rain water tasted bad ;
in Gujarat, some respondents also said that it had a brackish
taste or that it was tasteless.
Those who did not collect rain water said that it was difficult
collect rain water (12%) and that they did not need to do
to
available to them (18%).
so as there were other water sources
26% of the respondents in the state and 14% in the districts
said that rain water was not used for drinking as it caused
illness and
health problems,
It is worth looking at these
respondents in greater detail.
The respondents who spoke of rain water being a cause of illness
belonged essentially to the southern states of Tamilnadu and
Andhra Pradesh (43% in each).
In addition, 35% from Madhya
Pradesh also spoke of the same, The fact thast these 3 states
were not represented in the tracking districts could account
for the relatively low .mention of rain-water caused illness
by tracking district respondents where the highest mention
was found in 24 Parganas of West Bengal (20%).
At the state level, too, 18% of West Bengal respondents and
16% of Gujarat respondents said that rain water caused illness.
BI Q
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
53
This response came essentially from low and middle
income respondents, from illiterate and female respondents.
There was no clear trend by age.
BWB
Indian Market Research Bureau
54
2.0
STORAGE AND USE OE WATER
2.1
STORAGE PRACTICES
a/
The overall trend regarding storage appeared to be to
store water in the same container in which it .was
collected.
The main responses were as follows :
Base : All respondents
States
Tracking
districts
4418
2407
%
%
. Stored in the same pots
in which it was collected
52
56
. Stored in buckets
23
30
. Transferred to another pot
26
22
. Transfer not specified
7
7
Base :
The first two responses contain an element of overlap
since both responses could have been coded.
It is clear
however that only 22-26% transfer water to another pot
while the majority retain it in the same collection pot.
The practice of transferring water was most often
mentioned in Manipur, followed by Tamilnadu, Andhra
Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh.
This practice appears to
be relatively uncommon in Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal.
The issue of preferability between the two practices
is not clear On the one hand , over 95% of respondents
said that they threw stale water away and washed the
1WB
Indian Market Research Bureau
55
storage pot before storing fresh water which would make
the practice of transferring water an acceptable one.
On the other hand, the container in whcih water was
collected would necessarily be empty before collection
and to that extent, more assuredly hygenic.
There were no real differences in this storing practice
by age or household income.
Literate respondents, however,
practiced transferring more than illiterate respondents.
b/
Having brought the water home, 46% of all respondents
stored it in a platform or in a place specifically designed
for storing the pot.
29% kept the container on the floor
and, as we have seen, 23% stored water in buckets which,
we presume, would also be kept on the floor,
2% did not
store water as they had a private water source.
Thus, only 46% of respondents stored water in an acceptable
place, such that care was taken to ensure the relative
seclusion of the water container from other household/
kitchen items.
As had been identified in the qualitative study, these
special places could be platforms, made of mud, bricks,
wood or other material; they could be niches in the wall,
they could even be partition-like walls built to chest
height on which containers would be placed.
The practice of storing water on a platform was mentioned
in three states in particular. These were :
Indian Market Research Bureau
56
Gujarat : 88%
(Amreli :
Rajasthan : 72%
(Udaipur : 96%)
95%)
Madhya Pradesh : 72%
In other states too there was a mention of platforms/special
places to differing extents.
Uttar Pradesh
42%
Tamilnadu
4O?6
Andhra Pradesh
37%
West Bengal
5%
Manipur
5%
(Sultanpur : 42%)
This appeared to be a practice that was region specific
rather than being dependant on income, sex or education.
To some extent, older respondents (46 years
+) mentioned
this practice more than younger respondents (66% versus 60%).
However, the prevalence of the practice to similar degrees
in geographically contiguous states offers interesting
insights into its deep socio-cultural roots.
c/
Certain direct guestions were put to all respondents on
issues where indirect questions could lead to incorrect/
incomplete information and thereby cause difficulties in
interpretation.
These questions and their responses are
discussed below :
(Refer Table 7b : Water)
i/
Washing storage pot from inside before filling in fresh
water.
99% of all respondents said that they did do so.
Since
almost all answered in the positive, no real variations
Indian Market Research Bureau
57
exist.
Three districts where more than 1% answered in the
negative were :
:
1%
(24 Paraganas
Uttar Pradesh :
3%
(Sultanpur : 5%)
J
n°'
0/0
West Bengal
Manipur
:
2%)
The question being such that the socially acceptable and
would allow for some amount
"correct’’ answer was obvious, we
of overclaim in the response.
ii/
Throwing away stale water before
filling in fresh water
97% of respondents said that they threw away stale water.
In two states, West Bengal and Manipur, 11% and 21% of
the respondents said that they did not do so.
Since the first activity would not be possible without
that 96% of the
the second activity, we could safely say
respondents (or less) threw away stale water and washed
the pots from inside before filling in fresh water.
If we look at the fact that only 26% transfer water to a
storage pot, and that 74% therefore collect water and store
it in the same pot, it stands to reason that they would not
with stale water in it.
carry a pot to the water source
Therefore, at least 76% would be throwing away stale water
before filling in fresh water.
Indian Market Research Bureau
58
iii/ Filter water with cloth before storing it
Only 31% of all respondents filtered water with a cloth before
storing.
Once again, this practice was highly prevalent in
some states and very low in others.
Details were as follows :
%
%
Total of states (Districts)
31
(49)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
9
(5 )
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
75
(91)
West Bengal (24 Parganas)
12
(.6 )
Manipur
26
Tamilnadu
14
Andhra Pradesh
33
Gujarat(Amreli)
91
Madhya Pradesh
50
(95)
There were clear trends in the data that indicated that this
practice was more prevalent among upper income,younger and
literate respondents.
It was also reported more by women than
by men.
iv/
Cover the pot in which water is stored
Over 90% of the respondents followed this practice, with the
exception of Uttar Pradesh where 41% said that they did not do
so (43% did cover the pot in Sultanpur).
In .Manipur and
Madhya Pradesh 7% did not do so and 3% did not cover the storage
pots in Andhra Pradesh.
By and large, however, covering of
storage pots appeared to be a common practice.
Upper income and
literate respondents followed this practice significantly more
than lower income and illiterate respondents.
0)
Indian Market Research Bureau
59
v/
Boil water before storing
Not surprisingly, 96% of all respondents did not follow
this practice.
Those who did reportedly boil water
belonged to Manipur (16%), Tamilnadu (11%), Rajasthan (8%)
and West Bengal (6%).
In other states, less than 5%
of the respondents followed this practice.
vi/
Use of alum/chlorine
Only 2% of all respondents responded positively to this
statement.
In Manipur, 25% used alum/chlorine.
In Rajasthan 4%
followed this practice while in Uttar Pradesh, 3% did so.
This practice was reported significantly more by upper
income, younger and literate respondents than others.
d/
Mode of taking water from storage vessel
The hygiene level of water in a storage vessel would be
influenced by the way in which water was taken from the vessel.
If
hands were dipped in, the dirt on the hands could contaminate
the water.
If a container was dipped in and that container was
not clean, this could again contaminate the water.
The method by
which water was removed from the vessel was checked at the
interview.
Tap attached to vessel
Poured out from the vessel
22%
With ladle/container with handle
7%
Container without a handle
Other methods
68%
1%
D)
Indian Market Research Bureau
60
The two most acceptable methods i.e., use of a ladle and
the pouring out method are being examined in greater detail
below :
Base
All respondents
State
4418
Districts
2407
Pouring out
Use of Ladle
O'
/0
%
Total (Districts)
22
(20)
7
(5)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
38
(20)
6
(3)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
4
(2)
8
(4)
West Bengal (24 Parganas)
54
(59)
9
(11)
Manipur
15
53
Tamilnadu
16
1
4
Andhra Pradesh
(-)
Gujarat (Amreli)
Madhya Pradesh
8
13
(2)
10
As examination of the practices of dipping in a container with
a handle and a container without a handle (which would result
in finger contact with the water ) shows that the practice of
using a ladle appears to be directly correlated with a good
income, youth and literacy.
The use of a container without a
handle, on the other hand, appears to be directly correlated
with poverty and older age but not with literacy.
The details
are provided below :
UM»
Indian Market Research Bureau
61
Use a ladle
Use container
without a
handle
Below Rs 750
6
71
Rs 751
10
61
14
58
Less than 15 years
9
69
15 - 45 years
46+ years
6
4
67
74
Can read
9
68
Cannot read
5
68
Monthly household income
1500
Rs 1501+
Age
Literacy
Indian Market Research Bureau
62
3.0
UNDERSTANDING OF WATER
3.1
GOOD WATER AND BAD WATER
The primary questions on water pertained to good and bad
These terms had been used in response to the
terminologies that village people had been seen to use
water.
with regard to water.
They were then also questioned on their understanding
of water that was good for health and bad for health.
The responses are being given below :
Base :
All respondents - 4418
Good water
Good
for health
O'
/O
0/
/0
Visually clear
93
69
Sweet
87
46
Cooks food well
80
7
Cooks food fast
15
2
Pure/free of germs
12
19 .
Cool
6
2
Fresh
Light/feel light after drinking
5
3
4
3
Colour of cooked food does
not change
Free of odour
Refreshing/thirst quenching
Not specified
Average number of qualities
mentioned by each respondent
3
3
5
2
1
6
3.2
1.8
Indian Market Research Bureau
63
An examination of the above responses show that there was
a certain amount of commonality in perceptions regarding
qualities that rendered water good and good for health.
The difference was in emphasis.
Visual clarity was the first important factor in the
judgement of water, in absolute terms or in terms of
health.
Sweetness was the second most important factor,
While the
proportions of respondents who gave this response in the
context was almost half of those who had mentioned it in
the context of good water,
sweetness still emerged as an
extremely important indicator of water that would be good
for health.
Clearly, almost all respondents mentioned one or more of
these two factors as a consideration for water quality
vis-a-vis health.
Mention of factors that pertained to the water’s cooking
performance dropped dramatically in the context of its
evaluation from a health point of view.
While these factors
had received a total mention of 98% in the context of good
water, this total dropped to 9% in the context of health.
We conclude that while cooking properties are considered
highly important for water per se, these properties
are not seen to have much connection with the health.
Similarly, factors such as cool, fresh, light and refreshing,
which were taken into consideration in general evaluation of
water were mentioned less often in the context of health.
Indian Market Research Bureau
64
On the other hand, two factors were mentioned more often than
others in the context of water that would be good for health.
These were - "free of germs" and "free of odour".
In actual
terms the difference in frequency of mention is higher since the
number of respondents who mentioned multiple features in the
context of 'good for health' were fewer.
The concept of good water was one that respondents were more
familiar with rather than the concept of good for health.
This is based on two observation.
a/
6% of the respondents were unable to give any answer to
the question on "water that is good for health
were able to describe "good water".
while all
There were significantly
more female and illiterate respondents who were unable to
answer this question than others.
b/
In describing "good water"
each respondent mentioned an
average of 3.2 features while in describing water that is
"good for health " each respondent mentioned an average of 1.8
features.
We conclude, therefore, that people think of clear and sweet
water as being good for health but would look for something more
before labelling water as being "good".
The label "good water"
was a better known label, possibly more stringently measured and
included "good for health" within its fold.
Thus
we would venture
to hypothesize that all water labelled ’good’ would also be consi
dered to be 'good for health' but all water labelled "good for health."
would not necessarily be considered "good water ".
Indian Market Research Bureau
65>
Bad water and water that is bad for health were described
as follows :
Base : All respondents - 4418
Bad water
Bad for
health
0'
/□
0/
/0
Muddy/visually unclear
80
65
Food does not cook well
68
8
Salty
Impure/visible germs, insects
41
25
26
Bad tasting
22
32*
8
Smells bad
18
Tasteless
14
16
8
Cooked for does not keep
7
1
Food takes longer to cook
6
1
Colour of cooked food changes
6
1
Brackish
6
3
3
4
4*
3
3
1
2
3*
1
4*
3.2
4
2.0
Thick
Stale
Sour
Heavy to drink
Negative effect on digestion
Not specified
No. of responses/respondent
As with good water, visual clarity was the first measure
of bad water and for water that would be bad for health.
Visible impurities and germs were the second important factor
that indicated a health hazard.
Indian Market Research Bureau
66
Bad water was identified by absence of visual clarity, by
the performance of water in its food-cooking function, by
its taste and, importantly, by its smell.
.Other factors
that defined bad water were "thick, heavy, sour, stale
and brackish" - it is interesting that these features also
indicated, in almost equal measure, that the water was bad
for health.
As with the definition of water that is good for health,
' bad
for health' water is also defined by visual and taste
terms rather than by its cooking performance.
There were some state-wise differences in the relative
emphasis laid on various features of water.
highlighted below.:
These are being
In Manipur, 39% spoke of water that was "free of germs n in
the context of good water as against the average 12%. By
contrast, only 51% mentioned sweet taste (average 87%) and
only 35% mentioned "cooks food well" (35%).
In the context of bad water, 31°o of Manipur respondents
mentioned "tasteless" (overall average : 14%) and 42%
mentioned impure/germs visible as against the average of 14%
and 42% respectively.
In the Southern states of Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh, bad
water was identified as salty water by over 70% (overall
average : 41%) of all respondents.
They also emphasized (25%)
(overall average : 7%) that bad water could be identified
by the fact that food cooked in it would not keep for long.
In Andhra Pradesh, 28% spoke of bad water being "tasteless".
Indian Market Research Bureau
67
In Gujarat, 98% of the respondents spoke of sweetness as a
sign of good water (overall average : 87%) while 34% said
that food would cook fast in good water (overall : 15%).
Significantly more literate people spoke of visual clarity (74%)
and purity (free-of-germs) (22%) as indications of water
that would be good for health - than illiterate persons (65%
and 17% respectively).
Indian Market Research Bureau
68
3.2
WATER AND HEALTH
In response to a direct question that said "can bad
drinking water cause health problems?’ 95% answered in
the affirmative. 1% were unsure, 2% said it could not
cause health problems and 1% did not respond.
The lowest proportion of affirmative responses came from
Gujarat (88%).
5% were unsure and 6% said that bad
drinking water would not lead to health problems.
On this issue, it is pertinent to look at the four
tracking districts separately.
The trend of relatively high negative responses from
Gujarat persisted in Amreli district too where
unsure and 4% replied in the negative.
were
However, similar
level of negative responses were also received from
Sultanpur (Uttar Pradesh) and Udaipur (Rajasthan).
On the whole, significantly higher proportions of
illiterates gave a negative response as compared to
literates.
The fact that 95% of all respondents in the states and
93% in the tracking districts spoke of bad water causing
health problems would, in itself, be heartening.
However,
a closer look at the type of health problems mentioned in
this context reveals that there was a strong element of
guesswork or ignorance in the affirmative responses. Several
varying types of problems were mentioned, the most frequent
of them being :
Indian Market Research Bureau
PEOPLE’S PERCEPTIONS Wt!EALTHTP09iTMS^
CAUSED BY BAD DRINKING WATER
i
------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------- -—-———
--------------------------------- y
Fluorosis
Guinea worm
Cholera
tia lari a
p
R
Stomach ache
0
B
L Loose mot ion.-/ D i arrh
E
N
Mild S t omach Ups e t
-r
fif
3
3
1J
111111
I
-i-
j
I[Ji
-:;
C ?j u g h/Th roat a che
Cold
i
Fever
0
18
20
30
40
PERCENTAGE REPORTING
50
60
69
Base : All respondents
States
T racking
districts
%
%
Fever
51
41
Cold
50
37
Cough/Throat ache
33
26
Mild stomach upsets
18
25
Loose motions/diarrhoea
18
22
Stomach ache
14
12
Malaria
13
12
Cholera
10
10
Symptoms pertaining to the two health problems that are of
direct interest namely fluorosis
and guinea worm, were
not mentioned in large numbers from the states on the whole.
However, there was greater mention of these in some
tracking districts.
States
Districts
Guinea worm
1.5
5.8
Long worm from skin
0.1
0.3
Worms
3.0
3.8
Teeth turn black
0.3
0.3
Teeth turn pale
0.2
0.4
Pain in the joints
1.3
1.5
Body/bone become stiff
0.7
1.2
Hunchback
0.1
0.1
2.6
3.5
Indian Market Research Bureau
70
Guinea worm (naroo) related mentions formed 22?6 of
all responses in Udaipur as compared to the overall district
average of 6% and the overall state level mention of 1.6%.
2?o of responses in Amreli also pertained to guinea worm
but in Sultanpur and 24 Paraganas the mention was negligible
(0.7% and 0.2% respectively).
Symptoms of fluorosis accounted for 11% of the responses
in Amreli district of Gujarat as compared to the average
of all states which was 2.6%.
In other tracking districts
the mention of these symptoms was again negligible.
Within Amreli district "pain in the joints" was the most
frequently mentioned symptom : 4.6% while 4.0% of the
responses pertained to the symptom of body becoming stiff.
Other symptoms that were mentioned fairly frequently were ;
State
Districts
□Z
zO
0/
/O
Headache
17
9
Skin diseases
8
8
Bodyache
7
3
General health problems
6
5
TB
3
3
There were some state-wise variations in the relative
frequency of mentions of health problems related to water.
The states where a health problem was mentioned more fre
quently than the overall average are mentioned below :
WI D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
71
In Uttar Pradesh * worms (5%) and cholera (12%) were mentioned
to a slightly greater extent than average.
In Sultanpur, worms
was mentioned by 8% of the respondents and cholera - 13%.
In Rajasthan*, stomach related problems received emphasis.
Stomach-ache (25%), stomach upset (23%), loose mqtions (20%)
and vomiting (14%) were all mentioned more often than average.
Guinea worm was mentioned by 5% while skin diseases were
mentioned by 12%. Worms in general were mentioned by 6%
of the respondents.
Malaria was also mentioned more often
at 29%.
In West Bengal*, the emphasis was on stomach upsets (57,o)
and loose motions (46%).
No other health problems were
mentioned with a higher-than-average frequency.
In Manipur, respondents spoke mainly of loose motions(55%)
and cough (55%).
In Tamilnadu, the most frequently mentioned health problems
that were associated with bad drinking water were fever (83%),
cold (62%), headache (56%) and bodyache (12/«).
In Andhra Pradesh, several health problems were mentioned
more often than average.
*
These were :
Loose motions
25%
Vomiting
24%
Cold
65%
Fever
66%
Headache*
27%
All data pertaining to these four states is exclusive of
the data from the tracking districts in these states.
3
)|D’
Indian Market Research Bureau
72
Fluorosis related*
symptoms
(Highest average across States)
: 7%
The most important ones here
were :
Eye disease
:2.3%
Bodyache*
: 12%
Pain in the joints
5,1%
Body becomes stiff
1.2%
Teeth turn black
0.8%
*The combined mention of these symptoms point to the existence
of a problem that is either fluorosis or something similar in
Andhra Pradesh.
In Gujarat,
the problems mentioned often were loose motions
(33%), vomiting (29%), wo^ms (4%), guinea worm (10%),
fluorosis related sysmptoms (3%), skin diseases (15%),
cholera (20%) and malaria (23%).
problem
In Gujarat, therefore, the
of fluorosis is known and experienced in other
districts outside of Amreli; guinea worm and other worms are
also known and associated with drinking water.
Finally, in Madhya Pradesh, the overall frequency of mention
of any health problem was low.
Problems of cold and cough
were mentioned by 57% and 45% respectively.
However, no
other problem received above average mention.
Highest saliency regarding water related health problems was
found in the states of Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat.
This is based on two factors - the average number of problems
mentioned per respondent and the number of respondents who
did not mention any problems.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
15
Average responses/
respondent
% who did not
reply at all
2.9
1.9
Uttar Pradesh
Rajasthan
2.4
2.5
0.7
West Bengal
2.7
1.2
Manipur
Tamilnadu
2.5
2.6
3.2
0.1
Andhra Pradesh
3.5
1.5
Gujarat
Madhya Pradesh
3.4
Total
2.8
5.2
5.8
Indian Market Research Bureau
74
4.0
HANDPUMPS
4.1
EXISTENCE AND USE
The majority of the respondents (78%) had a handpump
in their village.
The relative proportions by state
and tracking district of those who said they had a
handpump were as follows :
%
i
Total (Districts)
78
(93)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
76
(93)
67
(97)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
82
(96)
Manipur
21
Tamilnadu
65
Andhra Pradesh
91
Gujarat (Amreli)
65
Madhya Pradesh
93
Rajasthan
(Udaipur)
(82)
Tracking districts were clearly well covered with
handpumps.
In the states, Tamilmnadu, Gujarat and
Rajasthan had relatively low coverage but Manipur,
at 21%, was the lowest.
In the 8 states, the existence of Mark II handpumps was
clearly high.
In tracking districts, on the other hand,
the focus was on traditional handpumps which accounted
for the major type of handpumps.
Responses on type of handpumps were elicited from res-
pondents with the use of photographs to avoid errors
based on miscomprehension.
Indian Market Research Bureau
75
The overall scenario regarding handpumps as reported by
respondents was as follows :
Base : All respondents - 4418
(% across)
Both
Mark II
Neither
States
Traditional
Total
22
39
17
21
Uttar Pradesh
27
9
39
23
Rajasthan
2
63
1
33
West Bengal
65
6
10
18
79
19
Manipur
Tamilnadu
4
52
9
34
Andhra Pradesh
14
76
1
8
Gujarat
26
30
9
34
78
13
7
Madhya Pradesh
Tracking districts
Base : 2407
Total
38
29
25
8
Sultanpur (Uttar Pradesh)
24
17
52
7
3
97
Udaipur (Rajasthan)
24 Paraganas (West Bengal)
96
Amreli (Gujarat)
30
4
3
49
17
Rajasthan clearly had essentially Mark II handpumps and
very few instances of overlap.
Andhra Pradesh and Madhya
Pradesh also had a similar situation with two differences :
1.
Madhya Pradesh had some degree of overlap where
traditional and Mark II handpumps co-existed,and
Ml
Indian Market Research Bureau
76
2.
Rajasthan had one third
third of respondents who were not
covered by handpumps at all.
Uttar Pradesh was different in that 39?^ of respondents
reported having both types of handpumps in their village
and in Sultanpur district, 52% reported existence of both
types of handpumps.
This was also the case in Amreli
district (49%) but was not true for the rest of Gujarat.
Usage
27% of all respondents mainly used the traditional handpump
as can be expected, the proportions using traditional
handpumps were higher in West Bengal (80%) and Uttar
Pradesh (44%).
mainly used the Mark II handpump - the proportions
were higher in RajasthaY (59%), Tamilnadu (52%), Andhra
Pradesh (57%) and Madhya Pradesh.
Only 1% of all r espondents who had handpumps in their
village used both types while 39% who had handpumps did
not use either type.
Non-users proportions were high in
Manipur (74%), Gujarat (51%) and Madhya Pradesh (57%).
The reasons for non-use are being dealt with in a later
portion of this section.
In the four tracking districts, 44% of all those who had
a handpump in the village used a traditional handpump, 29%
used a Mark II handpump, less than 1% used both and 27%
used neither.
Bffl® D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
77
In 24 Paraganas (West Bengal), 100% of those whose village had a
handpump used traditional handpumps.
In Udaipur (Rajasthan), on
the other hand, 81% of the respondents used the Mark II handpumps.
In Sultanpur (Uttar Pradesh) and Amreli (Gujarat) over 55% and
34% respectively did not use either type.
We are analysing usage of handpumps on the basis of the type of
in the villages to understand non-usage on the
handpump existing
basis of the handpump type.
WB
Man
TN
AP
Guj
MP
270
486
3
314
556
227
.571
%
?o
%
%
%
%
%
0'
zO
30
36
3
79
7
16
40
1
% of (a) who do not
use handpump
37
54
57
6
86
54
70
54
b/ Have Mark II handpump
50
12
94
8
98
80
83
46
84
% of (b) who do not
use handpump
42
48
38
30
73
42
39
36
49
22
52
2
13
14
1
15
14
Traditional
44
52
20
44
1
28
22
Mark II
22
16
33
50
49
20
16
Both
3
3
5
Neither
32
28
42
Base: Having any
handpump
a / Have traditional
handpump
c/ Have both
Total
UP
3449
1022
%
% of (c) who use
80
2
8
6
42
20
49
63
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
78
4.2
USES OF HANDPUMP WATER
76% of all respondents who used handpumps regularly
used the water for drinking purposes.
68% regularly used it for cooking purposes.
Drinking purposes
The highest proportion of regular users of handpump
water for drinking purposes came from Uttar Pradesh and
West Bengal.
In Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, close to 30% used hand
pump water sometimes for drinking purposes.
It is, however, more relevant to examine those respon
dents who said that? they never used handpump water for
drinking (8%).
It is interesting to note that those
who did not use handpump water for drinking were
relatively older, illiterate and belonged to lower
income groups.
The differences, however, were not
statistically significant.
In Manipur, none of those who used handpump water, used
it for drinking.
In Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh, 18%
of the respondents who used handpump water did not use
it for drinking purposes.
In Gujarat and Rajasthan, the
relevant proportions were 13%
and 15% respectively.
In Udaipur district 13% said that they never drank
handpump water while in Amreli 6% said so.
Bffli D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
79
68% of all respondents who used handpump water used it for
cooking purposes on a regular basis.
In Uttar Pradesh,
86% used handpump water regularly for cooking.
19% of all used it for cooking sometimes - In Rajasthan,
Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, such occasional use was
higher (36, 28 and 30%
respectively).
12% of all never used handpump water for cooking purposes.
These proportions were higher in Manipur (91%), West Bengal
(20%), Andhra Pradesh (18%), Rajasthan (17%) and Tamilnadu
(16%).
In the tracking districts, 28% of all respondents
in 24 parganas and 13% in Udaipur did not use handpump water
at all for cooking.
An interesting finding relates to water uses depending on
s
the type of handpump being mainly used. Before we go into
details of this, however, we need to make an important clarification.
When a particular handpurnp is being spoken of by a villager, he
is actually referring only to the visible, outward identification
of the water from the handpump and his satisfaction with the
pump water, His uses of that water are, thus, a reflection
on the water quality and not on the pump per se.
The water quality would, to some extent, be a function
of the depth to which the borewell has been sunk, the
quality of pipes that constitute the well and other
related features all of which contribute to the
overall quality.
Indian Market Research Bureau
80
Assuming that this clarification has been accepted, we
will now proceed to examine the findings on the basis
of the type of handpump that was being mainly used.
The differences that emerge have their own message
with regard to the water quality delivered by the
complete package of the traditional handpump (depth
of drilling, site, metals used, etc) versus the Mark II
handpump.
Used for drinking
Traditional
Mark II
Both
941
1147
26
%
%
%
Regularly
91
65
55
Sometimes
7
23
29
Never
3
12
16
Those who mainly used
Base :
I
Used for drinking
In all three cases, the differences in responses between uses of
traditional handpumps and Mark II handpumps are statistically
significant at a 99% level of confidence.
Thus, significantly more users of -traditional handpumps used the
water for drinking purposes on a regular basis; significantly
more users of Mark II handpumps never used the water for drinking
purposes.
Ml
Indian Market Research Bureau
r~.1
I
}
■
1
1
I
i
x;
o
o
z
I
I
I
f.“A
I
x;
<?
Q
i
r-'
i
rx;
!
o
n
(3
I
c?
i
■
I
r
IS
) <3
; <7>
11
:| I
J 3>
Li
1 | eo
I CO
i
W)
H
<r
l^i
Pm
IX
i
I
I a?
IT <c
>-4
1 1
<X
21
O
l^i
t§!
’X'
<c
4-*
cs?
in
H-M
IH
>-4
A
cc
JX
IH
■-^
O
!
M
co
CP
|W|
c?
o
c:
x
Ph
3=1
I
f-
I
I
isl
Q
gX'. !x!
&
C'
1^1
1^1
'u*
1°
w
r<>
i<z
i^i
I
•I
I JI
Ii
I
:"7q
co
i
l
.. >3
Cx3
I
: I
l.
j
__
fj—
91
4,’
2-
i
J
. . ..
£
£
<3
i
'■ ^4
I
•u- Cp
J.-
.7;
'k
7i
<v
•51
«u
**
®c
ICO)
IH
<E
t/>
u
>«
!li
Z'
>b
I
>4
f9
22
£
O
!Zi
<b
iX
81
______ Used for cooking
Traditional
Mark II
Both
941
1147
26
%
?0
%
Regularly
76
62
54
Sometimes
13
24
34
Never
11
13
11
Base :
Used for cooking
(Table 12e - Water)
Significantly larger proportions of traditional handpump
users used the water regularly for cooking purposes, signifi
cantly larger numbers of Mark II users used the water sometimes
for cooking purposes.
However, the difference between those
who never used handpump water for cooking was not significant
based on the type of handpump used.
Thus, we find that users>of traditional handpumps regularlyz
used the water for drinking and cooking purposes but users
of Mark II handpumps tended to do so less regularly.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
Ph
r:
c
-o
o
•XJ
M—g EW
Ph
<r
U-1 at s ar 4?
i
rw »-««.—-xr*
« uj mniftr
»»»rMROM^ffwaa-a «w •»
-g n’»» ‘ ■■" 1 m:
<v «i■
n. »»«ww^——mv^w■*
> , «irri n.r, r»>.'l
«rww» —cw»
in
Ljl.
X
’sD
*03
UJ
o
J=
fc
/sj
T2
(jO
r*-
P5
LTJ
if)
,
Lid
P:
, <. .: .^, z.; >J<.. ?
;>..■•.<
•o
*«...< ^’«7^ . ..• •■ ■.;'. <
tetaihtfis
m
iX
Q_
HJ
CO
Tp I
o
H
wsnWl7Mw*»-J‘J
}----------------- 1---------------- {—.............. !--------------- 4---------------- 1---------O
CS3
CS^
S3
<3D
0*0
OJ
U-)
■<r
*vO
co
N
pt; pq #-« O ££ {■*-»
X; e-
pp O o:)
.j «
w
fH
<c
H
O?
82
4.3
REASONS FOR NON-USE OF HANDPUMP
There are two types of non-use that are being studied
below :
non-use in general
non-use for drinking purposes
We will look at both types of non-uses in detail to
evaluate the factors that resulted in such non-use.
Base : All respondents
(States only)
Location too far
Location not suitable (other than
distance)
Monopolized by a few
Too much crowd/waiting
Water tastes salty
Water tastes brackish
Water tastes of iron
Water has rust
Water has bad smell
Others
Total
non-use
Irregular/
non use for
drinking
1326
496
%
0'
/0
59
28
3
2
6
9
6
8
2
3
3
3
49
10
24
3
2
5
4
64
(Refer Table 12g - Water)
MW
Indian Market Research Bureau
83
While distance was the single largest cause for general
non-use, distance as well as salty taste combined to keep
people from using the water for drinking purposes.
An analysis of this non-use by type of handpump being
referred to is provided below :
Non-users and non-users for drinking
Traditional
Mark II
Both
Base :
441
254
1123
?o
0'
/0
%
Location too far
40
54
55
Location unsuitable
3
3
3
Monopolized by a few
25
3
Reasons :
4
/
Too much crowd/waiting
3
9
2
Water tastes salty
10
16
5
Water tastes brackish >
2
2
2
Water tastes of iron
1
4
3
Water has rust in it
2
5
2
Water has bad smell
2
4
(Refer Table 12g - Water)
In addition, there were other complaints regarding water
that are being listed below :
Water quality is poor - food becomes red,rusty
Difficult to wash clothes
Health problems caused by water
Have other sources - will use if other sources fail
JWW)D
Indian Market Research Bureau
84
4.4
PROBLEMS IN THE USE OF HANDPUMP
Of those who had a handpump in their village, 48% said
that they did have problems in actual use.
Details were as follows :
Problems in use
States
Districts
3449
2214
0/
/O
O'
/O
(Districts)
48
48
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
42
23
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
52
47
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
57
68
Manipur
24
Tamilnadu
65
Andhra Pradesh
65
Gujarat (Amreli)
50
Madhya Pradesh
24
Base : Those who have handpump
in village
Total
53
(Refer Table 13 - Water)
Madhya Pradesh, Manipur and Sultanpur district (Uttar
Pradesh) reported the lowest levels of problems, while
Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and the 24 Paraganas district
of West Bengal reported the highest levels.
The complaints pertained mainly to difficulty in handling
and frequent breakdown.
Ml
Indian Market Research Bureau
85
Complaints
Relative frequency
Districts
States
States from which
above average frequency
1660
1060
O'
O'
/O
/O
Difficult because of
heavy/tough handle
43
54
Gujarat (79%)
Rajasthan (65%)
Tamilnadu (56%
Amreli district (84%)
Frequent breakdown
32
23
Uttar Pradesh (45%
West Bengal (43%)
Parts wear out
18
17
Uttar Pradesh (45%)
Crowded
15
10
Tamilnadu (25%
Andhra Pradesh (29%)
24 Paraganas(WB) (16%)
Number of handpumps
not sufficient
6
2
Andhra Pradesh (13%)
Tamilnadu (12%)
Water flow slight/weak
13
11
Manipur (20%)
Tamilnadu (22%)
Quantity of water
insufficient
9
6
Rajasthan (24%)
Manipur (80%)
12
10
Andhra Pradesh (20%)
Tamilnadu (13%)
Rajasthan (13%)
Base :
Quality of water not
good for drinking
An analysis of the same set of problems on the basis of
type of handpump being used is presented below :
IM® 0
D
Indian Market Research Burean
86
Users of
Traditional
Mark II
Both
None
513
680
19
448
%
%
0'
/0
%
Difficult - heavy handle
29
54
35
43
Freguent breakdown
45
23
54
28
Parts wear out
29
12
39
13
Crowded
9
22
30
13
Number of handpumps not
sufficient
3
8
Water flow weak
12
16
Quantity of water insufficient
7
10
Quality of water not good
for drinking
11
9
Base (States only) :
7
33
10
7
4
17
The Mark II pump suffered from problems of a heavy handle
that was difficult to use; the traditional handpump suffered
from the problem of freguent breakdown,
Parts also tended to
wear out more in traditional handpumps, possible a reflection
of their longer service, assuming they were installed before
Mark II handpumps.
Mark II handpumps had a large share of complaints pertaining
to crowds around the pump and to there being insufficient
numbers of handpumps.
Indian Market Research Bureau
CD
CD
JZ
o
!*!!!!!!£
tiniii
U?
<C
w I'
z
w
dimi.
gS&SSLi
k
<7?
W
in
a.
IO»
<E
X
LU-
i
I
I
ko__
CJ
»—<
-J
i
i
in
o
II
o.
□
■«
§
r 4
4X
'®Fr
■
Kiu
IxJ
—I
0.
O
UJ
<c
a.
IB!
!8
o
i
I
CL.
§
GO
Z
I
I
JD
ro
I
I
co
_c
(J
CL
UJ
o
or
u
c
co
a_
I
I
i
j
IN__
_ p_
0.
ki 5
i
i
!
iZi
X
w
c
(D
E
C
o
1
£>
$
»S
Ck
D
O
^4-
<E
r*.-...
rI
x
*x
.Tt____
B
i1
87
4.5
PUBLIC HANDPUMP OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE
a/
Ownership
In response to a direct question pertaining to the
villager's understanding of who owned the public
handpumps, the following responses were received :
Base : All respondents - 4418
Total
UP
Raj
TN
Gu2
MP
O'
-- 57
zO
0/
'0
/□
—
/O
Man
O'
zO
0/
/O
—
zO
O'
zO
zO
The government
66
69
76
70
52
45
60
42
85
Panchayat
14
4
15
12
7
18
30
41
6
Total
80
73
91
82
59
63
90
83
91
Public/Villagers
13
14
2
20
42
19
7
6
Others
,.5
11
5
1
1
3
2
19
2
WB
AP
It is clear that the majority believe the handpump to
be the property of the government or the panchayat.
In three states, Rajasthan, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya
Pradesh, this belief was particularly strong.
While there were no clear patterns by age and income,
men and those who were literate tended to believe
that handpumps were government/panchayat property some
what more than women and those who were illiterate.
The differences, however, were not statistically
significant.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
3
88
in th. tour tracking district, th. beliefs »ere =l">il« “th
of 82% (between 80% and 83%) believing that the
an average
public handpump was government/panchayat property.
Responsibility for maintenance
b/
Surprisingly however, this belief regarding ownership did not
automatically translate into responsibility for maintenance.
Inspite of believing that the government/panchayat owned public
public responsibility.
handpumps, respondents often saw maintenance as
Details were as follows :
Base : All respondents - 4418
Total
UP
WB
Man
TN
AP
Guj
MP
O'
/O
%
O'
%
%
O'
%
zO
%
24
46
29
37
29
55
3
30
20
22
27
Panchayat
33
24
27
38
45
47
22
Total
57
27s
76
42
54
67
82
76
77
Public
Others
24
33
20
53
12
7
24
16
17
39*
7
41
5
1
4
9
3
10
Government
/0
There were wide variations in beliefs, with 82% in Andhra Pradesh
believing that the responsibility lay with the government while in
Uttar Pradesh, only 27% believed so.
In West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh and Manipur, over one third of all
respondents believed that handpump maintenance was public responsibility.
*
20% of "Others” is comprised of "Gram Pradhan” ,
MBD
Indian Market Research Bureau
—7------
ir
1
I
I
I
s
i
I
CD
U
CD
I
I
1
»»!!?!»
w feih
-x
xz
o
c>
z:
w
•UV?!!!
tfUL
<y?
■&
■£ 1
W
lh
CL
CL
I
CJ
z
o
z
o
CL
Ld
O
or
LL
CL
CT)
-J
C2
ZD
CL
I
I
I
.n
CL
CD
Z
>—<
z
>—<
<
I—
z
'X
pLS
»—I
a:
o
Ld
CL
ll
lu
co
(Z)
z
o
CL
Ln
UJ
CL
w
i’S
%
Ld
-J
X
o
eo
o
ku,w®«
<?:
"co
ra
x:
Q
C
ro
CL
f
Ln
o
s
h x i»:kmb
<.......
X
V?
Ld
c
dj
<r
*
C
0)
■a™
MF Kk?Irg
r
z:
E
<T
<x
o
CD
£
xl
I
r*____
1
.. ....... r?___
wimim
89
In the four tracking districts, 33% of the respondents
in Sultanpur (Uttar Pradesh) and 42% in 24 Paraganas
(West Bengal) believed that the responsibility for
maintenance rested with the public.
In Rajasthan, only 18%'
believed this.
c/
Responsibility for payment for repairs
When the issue of payment for repairs was brought up there
was again a shift in opinion; the proportion of those who
believed that payment was government's responsibility was
higher than those who believed that maintenance was
government responsiblity.
This can be interpreted to
mean that while people are willing to take responsibility
for the actual, practical maintenance issues, they would
expect the actual cost to be borne by the government.
The percentages add up to
Details are presented below.
more than 100% because of some proportion of multiple
responses.
Base : All respondents - 4418
t
Man
TN
MP
O'
O'
zO
“57
zO
AR
—
zO
Guj
—57
zO
WB
—
/□
39
60
34
56
22
32
33
67
25
3
33
18
20
41
53
48
22'
Total
66
42
93
52
76
63
85
81
89
Villagers
23
28
13
48
46
14
13
24
9
Villagers - minor
3
6
3
33
1
1
Government - major
3
6
1
4
26
5
Others
10
23
3
2
1
4
Total
UP
Raj
O'
O'
O'
Government
41
Panchayat
zO
zO
zO
zO
1
7
2
Indian Market Research Bureau
7
90
Respondents in the four tracking districts expressed opinions
that were similar to the opinions expressed in the parent
state.
Significantly larger proportion of literate persons and
men expected the authorities to pay.
The difference however,
was not significant among those who believed that the public
should pay where 23% of literates and illiterates expressed
that opinion.
It would be useful to examine the proportions by state, of
those who assumed villagers were owners, responsible for
This is depicted below :
maintenance and payment.
Villagers/public and public handpumps
Base : All respondents - 4418
Responsible for
maintenance
Should pay
(?6 across)
Owners
Total (Districts)
13
(13)
24
(29)
23
(32)
Uttar Pradesh
(Sultanpur)
14
(12)
33
(33)
28.
(24)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
2
(4)
20
(18)
13
(29)
West Bengal
(24 Paraganas)
20
(16)
41
(42)
48
(52)
Manipur
42
53
46
Tamilnadu
19
12
14
Andhra Pradesh
7
7
13
Gujarat (Amreli)
19
Madhya Pradesh
6
(20)
24
16
(25)
24
(23)
9
Indian Market Research Bureau
91
4.6
WILLINGNESS TO PAY
a/
Regular [naintenance fees
Villagers were asked if they would be willing to pay
regular maintenance fees for the maintenance of hand
pumps and, if so, to state the amount that they would
be willing to pay.
"If villagers were asked to pay a fixed amount per month
regularly towards handpump maintenance, failing which
the pump would not be repaired, how much would you be
willing to pay per month ?"
Two out of three respondents were willing to pay a
regular monthly fee.
In West Bengal, 89% expressed their willingness; in
In Uttar Pradesh, Andhra
Manipur, 81% were willing.
Pradesh and Gujarat, between 70-80% expressed willingness.
In Tamilnadu and Rajasthan, the proportions were
smaller with only 51% and 57% being willing to pay.
The
lowest proportion came from Madhya Pradesh where only
36% of all respondents said that they would pay.
There were clear trends based on demographic variables.
73% of the people from Rs 1500+ MHI group were willing
to pay as against 66% from households where the monthly
income was less than Rs 750.
The younger respondents were clearly more willing to
pay than the older ones.
74% of those who were in the
15-25 year age group were willing to pay; this was reduced
to 65% in the middle age group and 57% in the older age
group.
Iffl D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
llAVERAGE AMT A HOUSEHOLD WILLING TO
PAY FOR MAINTENANCE OF HANDPUMP
-
I
■■-
- - .
li
25 y
28.4
29 4!
A
n
o
u
*£jWOSi
15
if
I
N
nn
1
1
18 4-
n
R
s
14.7
3®
I
i
i
s®
I®
I
!
iB
Wi,®
8.7
7.
i
i
4.3
i
0
t
Total
j 5
f
■B
J
-1-44 p'H-
5f
hI II
##11
Ipw*
8.6
.
pw
UP
3m&!$
Raj
WB
Man
STATE
TN
AP
HP
92
74% of those who were literate were willing to pay compared
to 61% of those who were illiterate, and 69% of men were
willing to pay compared to 65% of the women.
The average amount that respondents who had expressed willingness were ready to pay was Rs 9.00. This is the mean; the
median lay at a little over Rs 4.00 while the mode lay at Rs 2.00.
Details by states and demographics were as follows :
Average amount (Rs.)
Base : States
Districts :
2967
1589
Total (Districts
9.0
(6.9)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
8.6
(7.0)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
20.4
(13.0)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
4.3
(3.4)
Manipur
14.7
Tamilnadu
8.7
Andhra Pradesh
7.1
Gujarat (Amreli)
13.8
Madhya Pradesh
9.5
(7.1)
Monthly Household Income
Below Rs 750
Rs 751
1500
Rs 1501+
Rs
7.4
Rs 11.1
Rs 16.5
Age
15-25 years
Rs 9.7
26 - 45 years
Rs 8.9
46+ years
Rs 5.9
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
Pm
r
co
CD
I
I
‘jo
!o
FC.9
•JO
|3
s
IS
OO:iiMgy
fiffl&fefflffiffl
IS
nTrninTn
’
iinivu
-j
CD
Zj s/>
UO
CL.
<r
,mu......... ..
_j.„
"*'
Ld
CD
L'*****—,,***u*,‘r"',ww**"*,*J‘**'""‘
*
H
"*”'
; lZZZZ~T.ZZ?ZZZS^
tn
;■■—.miMWTrr-r- ir--:
CO
u0
<T
——■*
TZ
PS
3
rr
<§
«■
ro
Ld L-
fC
«
co
C£ £'
>
ro
□0
m
B
4-
cso
CD
•r^
30
cn
3?
r-
35
UO
CD
•.JO
<r: r. o
r
------ H
-+-
CD
CD
‘’t*
i ^2
30
04
m
p=
w
1
CD
93
The average amount by literacy and sex did not vary,
remaining constant at Rs 9.0.
b/
Willingness to contribute for handpump installation
While two thirds of all respondents were willing to pay on
a monthly basis for handpump maintenance, similar
willingness was not forthcoming for contributing to handpump
installation :
41% said that they would certainly contribute
44% did not wish to contribute and
15% were uncertain or did not know.
The highest proportion of affirmative responses were
received from Manipur (62%) while the lowest were received
from Madhya Pradesh (18%).
On an average, respondents
were willing to pay Rs 61.50. The mode however, was low
at Rs 5.00.
Base :
The median lay at Rs 16.00.
States
Districts
: 4418
: 2407
Willing to pay
%
OZ
/O
Average amount
Mean
Median
Rs
Rs
Total (Districts)
41
(36)
61.5
(42.6)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
42
(29)
45.1
(34.8)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
44
(24)
86.3
(85.9)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas
46
(47)
44.1
(30.2)
Manipur
62
68.3
Tamilnadu
42
56.9
Andhra Pradesh
49
95.6
Gujarat (Amreli)
53
Madhya Pradesh
18
(46)
60.3
(41.4)
92.4
D
0
Indian Market Research Bureau
94
In terms of demographics, those who were willing to pay belonged
income households, younger age groups and were literate.
to upper
An interesting deviation
from earlier patterns is that significantly
more women were willing to pay for
new handpump installation than
men (significant at 99% level of confidence). However, while women
expressed willingness to pay an average of Rs 42.6, men were willing
to pay Rs 81.00.
Indian Market Research Bureau
PART C :
SANITATION
BfflW
Indian Market Research Bureau
95
1.0
DEFECATION
1.1
DEFECATION SITES
The majority trend appeared to be that of common defeca
tion sites.
Very few respondents (13%) spoke of different
sites for different ages or sexes.
This conforms to the finding from qualitative research
when it had emerged that timings rather than places
were demarcated for the sexes.
87?o of all respondents spoke of common sites for all.
The
majority went outdoors (92%) of whom 10?o used sites that
were close to a water source while the others went to any
place outdoors.
Of the 13% who said that there were different sites for
different people, the majority were unable to specify
differences by children and elders which leads us to further
believe that there were in fact few site demarcations, if any,
and that those as existed were mainly for men and women.
Common
sites
Base :
Separate sites
577
3841
Men
Women
Children
Elders
%
-- 57
/□
0/
/0
0'
/O
Oz
zO
Outdoors
82
59
64
18
29
Outdoors, near water
10
29
13
9
8
Private latrine
8
6
15
6
6
1
2
1
Public latrine
1
Inst, latrine
Not specified
7
7
65
Indian Market Research Bureau
56
96
We will look at the differences in practice by state, concen-
trating for this purpose on those who have mentioned common
sites only.
Base :
States
:
Districts :
4418
2407
(a)
Common sites
mentioned by
(% of total)
(b)
Location (a ~ 100%)
Outdoors
Private
near
Latrine
Outdoors water
Public
Latrine
Total (Districts
87
(85)
82
(81)
10
(11)
8
(8)
(-)
Uttar Pradesh
(Sultanpur)
93
(87)
90
(85)
7
(14)
3
(1)
(-)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
96
(99)
87
(93)
5
(5)
8
(2)
(-)
West Bengal
(24 Paraganas)
75
(66)
53
(42)
35
(30)
12
(28) -
(-)
Manipur
94
12
85
2
Tamilnadu
76
75
7
7
1
Andhra Pradesh
90
89
2
8
1
Gujarat (Amreli)
78
(87)
89
(91)
2
(-)
10
(8)
(-)
1
12
7
(Refer Table 1a-c)
In Manipur, 85% of all respondents used a private latrine. In
Madhya Pradesh
83
80
Madhya Pradesh 12% used private latrines. In West Bengal too,
12% used private latrines (28% in 24 Paraganas district) while
35% went to an outdoor site that was near a water source, In
fact, West Bengal was the one state where the practice of
defecating near a water source appeared to be high.
Users of private latrines were clearly from upper income house-
holds.
Rs 1500+
28?o used private latrines
Rs 750-1500
14% used private latrines
Upto Rs 750
4% used private latrines
Indian Market Research Bureau
31
The proportion of latrine users among literate persons was
significantly higher than that among illiterate persons.
Literate
13?6 used latrines
Illiterate
2% used latrines
Indian Market Research Bureau
98
1.2
CRITERIA FOR SITE SELECTION
defecated outdoors said that
10% of all respondents who
went wherever he
there were no criteria and that a person 1
' more often from
wished, This response came significantly
illiterate rather than literate persons.
criteria for selection, the two
Of those who did have some
criteria that were most frequently mentioned were :
Privacy
61%
Cleanliness
63%
While the demand for privacy came
in more or less equal
or literacy, the need
measure, irrespective of income, age
for cleanliness was expressed more by the upper income and
literate respondents.
mentioned were :
The other criteria that were
9%
Not where members of the opposite sex go
n°/
Water should be available close-by
?
Not in fields with grown crops
:
Should be far from village
O/O
4%
1%
no choice since
y/Q of all respondents said that there was
reported by 54%
fixed places had been assigned. This was
of the people in Manipur. It was also mentioned by 15%
in Uttar Pradesh, 12% in Tamilnadu and 11% in Gujarat.
There were some state-wise differences
in the selection
critiera.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
99
Respondents from Gujarat (84%), West Bengal (72%) and
Andhra Pradesh (70%) laid greater stress than average on
privacy.
This was also borne out in the tracking districts
where 83% in Amreli (Gujarat) and 80% in Udaipur (Rajasthan)
spoke of the need for privacy.
Cleanliness was stressed in Rajasthan (73%) and Andhra
Pradesh (71%).
At the district level, however, the largest
mention came from Sultanpur in Uttar Pradesh (84%).
Those
who stressed cleanliness were also more often from the
upper-income and literate groups.
Respondents from West Bengal (16%), Tamilnadu (18%) and
Manipur (15%) stressed the need for having water available
nearby.
It is interesting that this demand was made
primarily by men (83% of those who spoke of water nearby
were men, 17% women).
In Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat, 28% and 24% respectively
said that one criteria for selection of site was that it
should not be the same place as used by members of the opposite
sex.
This was mentioned more by women (11%) than men (7%).
QJ
Indian Market Research Bureau
100
1.3
ATTITUDES TO OUTDOOR DEFECATION
Positives
Respondents were asked to speak on those aspects of outdoor
defecation which they considered nice or positive.
58% of the respondents in the states and as many as 72% in
the districts said that there were no positive aspects to
outdoor defecation.
Those who said n None” are being looked
at in detail in the table below :
States
Districts
Base :
4418
2407
None
O'
/O
Total (Districts)
58
(72)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
42
(44)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
55
(76)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
88
(88)
Manipur
40
Tamilnadu
55
Andhra Pradesh
59
Gujarat (Amreli)
68
Madhya Pradesh
66
(78)
States :
Income
%
Sex
%
Below Rs 750
56
Male
42
1500
66
Female
74
Literate
48
Illiterate
68
Rs 751
Rs 1501+
62
It is interesting that
the illiterate and middle income
respondents as well as women expressed greater antipathy
towards outdoor defecation than literate respondents and men.
1WB D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
101
Those who did mention positives spoke primarily of the fresh
air and open space that was a part of outdoor defecation (31%).
This was particularly mentioned by Uttar Pradesh and
Rajasthan respondents (52% and 36% respectively).
46% in Sultanpur (Uttar Pradesh) also mentioned fresh air
as a positive feature. It was also mentioned more often by
men and those who were literate.
8% believed that outdoor defecation was a cleaner practice
(as opposed to something that was not outdoor e.g latrines)
since excreta was left far from the house (15% in Tamilnadu
and 13% in Rajasthan said so).
This was mentioned more often
by lower income and older respondents and more often by men
than by women.
8% also said that an advantage of outdoor defecation was the
absence of any bad smell. This positive feature was
mentioned by 22% in Manipur, 19% in Tamilnadu and 14% in
Andhra Pradesh.
Other positives mentioned were
States
Districts
—v---/0
0/
zO
Outdoor defecation does not create
a health problem
3
2
No cleaning up after defecation
2
1
Excreta does not accumulate in one spot
1
yr
■
/ ?1
V5 f
S' J
■
--
C 4'
//
.X“
D
Q
Indian Market Research Bvreao
'o
30
102
Negatives
The major problems with regard to outdoor defecation that were
spoken of related largely to occasion or situation related
inconvenience rather than any sustained negatives.
The main negatives mentioned were as follows :
States
Districts
4418
2407
%
%
Problematic during monsoon
32
24
Problematic at night
17
16
Problematic in ill-health
8
7
Problematic in emergency
2
1
Problematic in winter
7
4
Total mention of occasion related problems 66
52
Lack of privacy
30
45
Need to walk a long distance
28
36
Place is dirty
10
6
Shortage of space
7
5
Causes ill-health
7
5
Lot of time wasted
5
7
Causes flies/mosquitoes
4
3
Snakes/Scorpions
4
4
Problem of water scarcity
4
3
Bad smell
3
3
Base : All respondents
JU D
D
Indian Mufcet Research Bareau
103
Thus, there were some problems which were present on a
continuous basis such as lack of privacy and distances that
had to be covered.
The former was widely mentioned in West
Bengal (76%) while the latter was mentioned in Gujarat (44%),
Andhra Pradesh (38%) and Rajasthan (32%).
17% of all respondents in the states and 18% in the tracking
districts said that there were no negatives in outdoor
defecation.
The proportions of respondents who said "no negatives" were
higher in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Tamilnadu than in
other states.
They were lowest in West Bengal, Manipur
and Andhra Pradesh.
At the district level, 39% in Udaipur (Rajasthan) and 20%
in Sultanpur (Uttar Pradesh) said that there were no
negatives.
There were a greater proportion of such responses compared
to the average from lower income respondents and those who
were in the older age group.
It stands to reason that
lack of choice or force of habit had reconciled these groups
to the practice of outdoor defecation.
Bffl Q
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
104
1.4
practtces related to defecation
direct manner on some practices
Respondents were questioned in a
related to defecation. These are discussed below :
1.4.1
Practice of covering or disposing excreta
99% of those who defecated outdoors said that they did not cover
' . This was true in both states and districts.
or dispose excreta.
the absoluteness of this response, the details by states,
Given t..~---become irrelevant and are therefore not
districts or demographics
being discussed further. 1
The 37 respondents (weighted sample : 21) who did speak of disposing
excreta spoke of two methods :
53% said that they covered it with dry soil/sand
13% said it was washed away with water, presumably into the
water source nearby
5% said they covered it with leaves
30% gave no explanation
1.4.2
Method of cleaning hands
61% of the respondents in the states and 76% in the tracking
districts said that they washed their hands with water and mud
or ash.
IM D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
105
Details were as follows :
States
Distrits
4418
2407
%
%
Wash with water only
Wash with water and soap
24
7
14
16
With water and ash/mud
61
76
Others/not specified
1
Base : All respondents
(Refer Table 8a-c)
Respondents in the four tracking districts clearly had better
knowledge of the need for a good hand wash after defecation.
This was evident from the fact that 92?o of them used either
mud or ash or soap while only 75% did so in the states.
We will examine each practice in greater detail :
?6
Wash with water only
Total (Districts)
24
(7)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
4
(12)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
(1)
Manipur
Tamilnadu
Andhra Pradesh
1
4
63
90
77
Gujarat (Amreli)
Madhya Pradesh
19 (16)
3
(1)
MBD
Indian Market Research Bureau
HOW DO PEOPLE CLEAN THEIR 1
HANDS ?j
1.00v.
bl. 08/:
1S1SB1
'!
■
uX' Water only
=
* A /s
/. z
-A /*•
;<. x zx. A. A.X’XXXXl
x > ‘ x .XXx'.xX^X Xj
24.007.
Water ?<
soap
Water &
ash/mud
Hi Others/Not
specif led
14.00’z
I
i
ii
i
I
I
106
The Southern
Differences are stark and emerge clearly.
states of Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh and the Eastern
state of Manipur have a high proportion of people who do
not use •mud/ash/soap after defecation.
These proportions of people who used water only were
and older age
s ignificantly higher in the lower income
group.
%
Wash and soap
Total
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
14
(16)
11
(10)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
11
(14)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
11
(11)
Manipur
33
Tamilnadu
8
Andhra Pradesh
21
Gujarat (Amreli)
29
Madhya Pradesh
13
(30)
The highest practice of soap use was reported from Manipur,
Gujarat (including Amreli district) and Andhra Pradesh.
There was a higher proportion of soap users in the upper
income, younger and literate groups.
%
Washing with water and ash/mud
Total (Districts)
61
(76)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
84
(78)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
85
(85)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
84
(88)
Manipur
2
Tamilnadu
Andhra Pradesh
1
Gujarat (amreli)
50
Madhya Pradesh
83
(53)
D)
Indian Market Research Bureau
107
Clearly, some states had a traditional practice of using mud
and ash since the practice was widely prevalent in some states
and conspicous by its absence in others, which were the
Southern states of Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh and the
Eastern state of Manipur.
In Gujarat the combination of those who use mud/ash/soap
helps bring the total of those using any cleaning agent to
80% and 83% (Amreli).
It would appear that some 30% of all
respondents have upgraded to soap from the mud/ash combination.
However, 20% in this state still used water only.
It would be useful to examine hand washing practices on the
basis of demographic variables.
Base : All respondents - 4418
Water only
Water +
soap
Water + mud/
ash
Below Rs 750
29
10
60
Rs 751 - 1500
14
21
64
Rs 1501+
12
35
51
15 - 25 years
25
18
55
26 - 45 years
23
13
64
46+ years
32
9
57
Literate
23
20
57
Illiterate
26
9
64
Male
27
11
62
Female
22
17
60
(?□ across)
Income
Age
Literacy
Sex
0
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
108
adopted by the
Soap usage is clearly a recent phenomenon
use of water only
young, upper income and literate groups, '
i and somewhat higher
is markedly higher in lower income groups
among older age
groups.
Use of mud and ash is again prevalent among lower income,
illiterate groups but prevalence is not considerably low in
other groups either.indicating a practice that runs across
socio-economic para;' :ters.
Of those who used a cleaning agent, 91% said that they
always used a cleaning agent.
7% said that they did
sometimes clean their hands with just water. There were
a higher proportion of those who used just water (sometimes)
in Manipur (23%) and Gujarat (21%).
Indian Market Research Bureau
r~
- s
c o
o c
Q
I
I
!
<c .
<.5 L
za
^11.
X
I
I
st
Bjy jf®^|
-yI*"’
Jffi m
<
r
o
X
u.
**4
S
ij
-J
UJ
X
L
)
wg' w//w// ■ - W
ZZZ^
WPF Pi
I
X
CH
<
I
I
LT)
o
1
I
I
I
to
<
UJ
ac
o
x
UJ
Q
UJ
cn
o
E
CD
X
o
X
X
UJ
Z
«x
c~«
cz
<r
CH
UJ
X
.’X
UJ
£
z
a
z
o
I
I
a.
Ld
CJ
a:
UJ
CL
ID
UJ
a.
o
E
u
co
r'
X
UJ
Q.
»lHl
r
i
I
I
<-z
W
I
a
PS
P-<
T/cc
.5-
■a:
H
H
F
)
I
i
i
i
)
xt...
rr
i
ggr
ip
sswissif fiin:
S#S^
7
g
fo^fi
1
I
fc:
x Jk b£ t. __
inirii
itwatftinri
p>
!
I
,L
..J
109
1.5
KNOWLEDGE REGARDING OPEN EXCRETA AND HEALTH
63% of all respondents at the state and district levels and
that open excreta was harmful to health.
22% believed that it was not harmful while 15% did not know.
Details of these responses by state and tracking district
is provided below :
Base :
States
4418
Districts
2407
(% across)
Harmful
Not harmful
Don't know
Total (Districts)
63
(63)
22
(17)
15
(20)
Uttar Pradesh
(Sultanpur)
77
(64)
12
(27)
11
(10)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
56
(33)
19
(18)
25
(48)
West Bengal
(24 Paraganas)
77
(82)
6
( 5)
17
(13)
Manipur
84
4
12
Tamilnadu
41
42
16
Andhra Pradesh
50
37
13
Gujarat (Amreli)
64
Madhya Pradesh
50
(73)
26
(17)
10
(10)
13
37
(Table 5c - C)
Those who believed that open excreta can cause harm to health
did so for the following reasons :
State
District
O'
zO
0/
zO
Bad smell causes headache and sickness,
germs are carried by the wind, germs
are breathed in
57
62
Breeds flies and mosquitoes
37
33
Causes disease/stomach ache
21
22
Flies sit on excreta then on food
18
21
People step on excreta and spread it
7
4
Infection spreads from sick person's
excreta
4
2
Indian Market Research Bureau
110
The belief that the bad smell emanating from excreta was
in itself a cause of ill-health had been mentioned even
during the qualitative phase of this study where respon
dents had explained that the smell was, quite literally,
sickening.
This factor was mentioned by over 60% of the
respondents in the states of Uttar Pradesh (68%) and
Gujarat (64%) (In Sultanpur, 63% mentioned this point
while 74% did so in Amreli).
It was mentioned more often by people with a monthly
income of less than Rs 1500 and by younger respondents.
That open excreta was a breeding ground for flies and
mosquitoes was mentioned by over 50% of the respondents
from Manipur (60%), Gujarat (57%), Tamilnadu (54%) and
Andhra Pradesh (54%).
It was mentioned by upper income,
literate respondents.
Open excreta was seen as a cause of stomach ache and
disease by respondents from Rajasthan (47%), Andhra Pradesh
and Gujarat (32% each).
This was mentioned significantly
more often by persons from older age groups (46 years +)
than others.
Knowledge about flies sitting on excreta and then on food
being a cause of disease was mentioned by upper income and
literate respondents.
Those who believed that open excreta did not cause any
harm to health hold this belief on the basis of the
following observation.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
111
State
Districts
970
406
%
%
Excreta eaten up by pigs
37
23
Excreta eaten up by other animals
19
18
56
41
31
20
29
41
Base
Excreta dries up
Not harmful because defecation
far from village
(Table 7-c)
M®
Indian Market Research Bureau
112
2.0
LATRINES
2.1
AWARENESS 0E LATRINES
Respondents were shown pictures of two types of latrines the water seal pour flush type (hereafter referred to as
a flush latrine) and the dry type.
All were asked if
they had ever seen it and, if so, if they had ever used
one.
37?o of the respondents on the whole and 41% in the
tracking districts had seen dry type latrines.
52% of
respondents at the state level and 61% in the tracking
districts had seen a flush latrine.
Details of awareness and use of latrines, by type, were
as follows :
State
Dry
Flush
Base: All respondents
District
Dry
Flush
4418
2407
%
O'
/O
%
%
Seen
37
52
41
61
Used
22
40
27
49
(Refer Table 9a - C)
The exposure to and use of pour flush latrines was higher
at state and district levels, where almost twice as many
people had used flush latrines rather than dry ones.
We will look at usage-related data by individual states
and districts.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
SiAWARENESS & USE OF LATRINES I
60t
52
ffii
501
lfr
!
P
r 40 4R
C
E
N
pa
3?
iV'T'TTT
YXXW «
:;<XXW :T
B«x>
mA
*:
■KO*'
XXX. XX d’
G 20-^
E
10{
I
0
XAX.Z ;< X
.1
Ki’H;
Kx»ft
Ws
i
ted
Kd
!
f
3:•<
Ji
TVPE OF LATRINE
I
0 See n
i
I
•■I
I
i?!
i-3
X>x<:
Xxx*: l. ...........
?xxw - • J
Flush
Dry
I
;;l
Bi
Td
ted
I
:n
Mvd iT
E»
T
A
40
i El Used
i
113
States used
Flush
Dry
(% across)
Districts used
Flush
Dtj/
4418
2407
Base:
States
Districts
Total
(Districts)
22
40
27
49
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
21
31
32
43
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
26
37
26
34
29
45
33
54
Manipur
Tamilnadu
81
6
18
49
Andhra Pradesh
17
45
Gujarat (Amreli)
17
54
16
68
Madhya Pradesh
22
36
Users of Flush latrines
(States only)
Income
%
A^e
%
Below Rs 750
1500
Rs 751
35
49
15-25 years
26 - 45 years
44
38
Rs 1501+
61
46+ years
38
Literacy
Sex
Men
Women
48
31
Literate
Illiterate
56
24
(Table 9b - C)
The highlights of the above analysis are :
o
There was very high usage of dry latrines in Manipur and
very low usage of flush latrines.
Indian Market Research Bureau
114
o
Highest usage of flush latrines was found in Gujarat,
Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal.
o
Users of flush latrines came from upper income groups
and younger age groups .
There were high proportions
of users among literate groups and among men.
Given that private flush latrines were only reported from
35% of all the villages covered (which only owner
families would have had access to and not the whole
village) the trend of high experience of using flush
latrines indicates that those who had experienced flush
latrines had done so either in towns or in some public
places such as railway stations and hospitals-
Indian Market Research Bureau
115
2.2
PERCEPTIONS REGARDING EXCRETA DISPOSAL
In the long run, acceptance and use of flush latrines
will depend on people having a clear understanding of
the way in which a flush latrine functions and of the
input of time and energy that will be required from them
to maintain such a latrine.
It was therefore important
to estimate the level at which this understanding
currently
exists, to measure the extent of understanding
that prevail^with a view to creating appropriate
communication, information and education
materials
as needed.
With this objective, respondents were questioned about
their understanding on four
issues.
where does the excreta, flushed away from the pan, go ?
how frequently would a pit need to be cleaned ?
when the pit was opened for cleaning, what would
be
the state of the contents
how would these pit contents be disposed
off ?
Each of these questions and the resultant responses
are being discussed below:
2.2.1
Where does the excreta go
?
People who were aware of a particular type of latrine,
were asked to answer with reference to that type of
latrine.
Perceptions were somewhat different for each
type.
1
Indian Market Research Bureau
116
Flush
Dry
States
Districts
States
Districts
1632
987
2278
1470
0/
/0
0/
/O
0/
/0
0/
/□
Into a pit/well in the
ground
65
65
43
55
Into a sewer/tank
11
8
38
28
8
13
7
6
Others
16
13
12
12
Don't know
Base
(Table 10 (i) - C)
of flush latrine supports
The mention of sewer/tanks in the case
had been used in urban
the earlier hypothesis that flush latrines
areas where sewage systems exist.
There were a significant proportion of "Don’t know" answers from
the lower income groups, the older age groups, from those who were
illiterate and from women.
2.2.2
Frequency with which pit needs to be cleaned
This question was only asked to those
respondents who had mentioned
that excreta goes into a pit.
There were a wide range of responses which merit attention since
they are indicative of the confusion that exists and of the need
for clear communication on the subject.
rrroi b)
Indian Market Research Bureau
117
States
Districts
1850
1208
%
%
Once a week or more often
7
6
Once in 1-2 weeks
5
4
Once in 2-6 weeks
6
7
18
17
Once in 1.5 - 6.5 months
10
11
Once in 6.5 - 12 months
6
7
16
18
Once in 1-2 years
9
11
Once in 2-4 years
7
6
Once in 4-6 years
8
7
Once in 6 years or less often
13
15
37
39
30
27
Base :
Frequency of cleaning
Don’t know/Other answers
(Table 11a - C)
34% in the states and 35% in the districts believed that the
pit would have to be cleaned once a year or more often,
The
prospect can be daunting, particularly for those who believe
that the pit would have to be cleaned as frequently as once
in a week or even once in six weeks.
b5
Indian Market Research Bureau
I
.
.
4fiWft. b 4l
.—
-
)
(
2
c o
o c
Q
I
1
I
4<|iefe^g
I'M
<X'
w '-hWbX
m ifi ml! fO
CD
$
§
c co
s
■H (D
0)
U
C I
O t-
CD
Z
>—<
§
Ld
-J
U
52
■
!
L
M_
<2
CD
o
(1)
(U
LJ
Z
Ld
0
O'
Ld
O'
CO
\D O
0
UJ
O 4-)
3
c
Hr L
(/> ff
•H
CO
<2: U
0)
CJ
CO
<j: \
I
n
O
c o
Id
CJ
Id
Q.
)
<\5
K'1
I
I
I
I
C CD
co
_C (D
ZE
3
C
D kO
6
j_>
0
U- C
O -H
(D
Cm
0)
U
o c
z o
w
■3
Vrt-
Ml
«E \|
a \
H
r
X
gi
kr.
uC
SSS®s®
118
An analysis of the frequency of cleaning as estimated by
respondents from different states and demographic groups is
given below:
(% across)
States only
More often
than once
in 6 weeks
Once in
6 weeks
to 1 year
Once in
1-6 yrs
Don ’ t
know
Total
17
16
37
30
Uttar Pradesh
17
22
40
21
Rajasthan
19
17
30
34
West Bengal
21
20
37
22
4
92
4
Base : 1850
Manipur
Tamilnadu
31
16
32
21
Andhra Pradesh
13
9
40
38
Gujarat
14
12
35
39
Madhya Pradesh
4
8
41
47
Below Rs 750
20
16
34
30
Rs 751
14
13
43
30
Rs 1500+
10
15
47
28
15
25 years
20
18
37
25
26 - 45 years
15
15
38
32
46+ years
43
12
9
36
Literate
15
16
43
26
Illiterate
23
15
23
39
Men
16
17
44
23
Women
19
14
2.1
40
Income
1500
Literacy
Sex
0)
bi
Indian Market Research Bureau
119
Respondents in Manipur were very well informed with over
90% giving an acceptable answer and none who had a totally
wrong idea.
The idea of very frequent cleaning needs emerged strongly
from Tamilnadu while the highest proportion of "don't know"
responses came from Madhya Pradesh.
The highest proportion of the notion-holders that pits
had to be cleaned once in 6 weeks or more often belonged
to the older age group, possibly because of the abhorrence
among older people, of the thought of excreta accumulating
in one place.
Literate persons and men held more correct ideas regarding
pit cleaning frequencies than illiterate persons and women,
a large number of whom expressed ignorance on the subject.
2.2.3
Knowledge of pit contents
The majority of respondents (53%) expected that the pit
contents at the time of cleaning would be in liquid form
and that they would have a bad smell (81%).
Details were as follows :
Indian Market Research Bureau
120
Base :
State
Districts
: 1850
: 1208
Smell
Form of waste
Don' t
Not bad .know
Liquid
Dry
Don' t
know
Total (Districts)
53 (59)
28 (23)
19 (18)
81 (83)
9 (7)
10 (10)
Uttar Pradesh
(Sultanpur)
49 (58)
44 (29)
7 (14)
95 (94)
3 (4)
2 (3)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
58 (68)
21 (15)
21 (17)
87 (85)
4 (10)
9 (5)
West Bengal
(24 paraganas)
69 (67)
22 (25)
9 (8)
86 (85)
8 (9)
7 (5)
Manipur
52
35
13
31
40
29
Tamilnadu
51
27
22
76
16
8
Andhra Pradesh
45
33
22
76
13
12
Gujarat (Amreli)
49 (46)
14 (23)
37 (31)
75 (74)
4 (6)
20 (20)
Madhya Pradesh
45
23
32
64
13
23
(% across)
Bad
(Table 11b & 11c - C)
The highest proportion of correct answers came from
Uttar Pradesh in the area of the form of the waste
followed by Manipur and Andhra Pradesh.
Very few respondents across all regions except Manipur
expected that the excreta would not smell bad.
This
again is an area where education of the people would be
necessary.
One very interesting observation was that a higher pro
portion of people from older age groups expected the pit
contents to be dry and also to not have a bad semll.
Indian Market Research Bureau
121
■ 2.2.4
Disposal of contents of opened pits
49?o of respondents in the states and 46% in the tracking
districts said that the contents of opened pits would be
used as manure.
of which
However, the balance had misconceptions some
could cause unnecessary resistance to the idea of
latrines.
The first of these was that the pit contents would have
to be transferred to another pit (13% at state level and
22% in the districts).
This belief was expressed by respondents from West
Bengal (28%), Manipur (42%), Gujarat (16%).
At the
district level again this belief was mentioned by respon
dents from the district of 24 Paraganas, West Bengal (41%)
more than from any other district.
This belief could cause acceptance problems since if
such transference to new pits was to continue ad
infinitum, the prospect of a countryside dotted with
excreta pits could be unnerving and appear to be a
mindless exercise.
Education on this subject would
therefore also be necessary.
The second idea was that the excreta thus removed from
the pit would have to be thrown outside the village or
outside the house.
If we remember that respondents
expected the contents to be liquid in form and have a foul
*r
JB
Indian Market Research Bureau
122
smell and one out of three expected that this exercise would
have to be repeated more often than once a year, their
aversion to the idea would again be understandable.
This
understanding was expressed from the following states :
Base :
: 1850
: 1208
States
Districts
Thrown outside the •
The house
Throw in
in drain
(4)
5 (6)
2 (2)
5
(6)
3 (13)
3 (5)
20 (18)
12
(7)
7 (7)
1 (4)
West Bengal
(24 Paraganas)
11 (10)
6
(4)
4 (4)
1 (2)
Manipur
4
2
2
Tamilnadu
13
7
2
4
Andhra Pradesh
25
16
6
3
Gujarat (Amreli)
19 (7)
10 (3)
8 (4)
1 (-)
Madhya Pradesh
9
4
5
(% across)
Total
Village
Total (District)
16 (12)
9
Uttar Pradesh
(Sultanpur)
11 (24)
Rajasthan
(Udaipur)
Refer Table 11d - C)
Those who knew that the pit contents could be used as manure
were found in significnatly higher proportions in upper income
groups, among literate rather than illiterate people and among
men rather than women.
Indian Market Research Bureau
123
3.0
LATRINES IN THE VILLAGE
3.1
INSTALLATION OF LATRINES
Dry type latrines installed in villages were reported by
32% of the respondents in the states and 23,% in the
districts.
Flush type latrines installed in the village were reported
by 43% in the states and 50% in the districts.
Details of latrine installation as reported were as follows :
Base : Those aware of latrine type :
3.1.1
(% across)
Dry type
Flush type
Total (Districts)
32
(23)
43
(50)
Uttar Pradesh
17
(8)
24
(7)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
34
(16)
32
(19)
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
48
(47)
60
(74)
Manipur
93
45
Tamilnadu
48
62
Andhra Pradesh
36
37
Gujarat (Amreli)
17
Madhya Pradesh
20
Community latrines
(4)
52
(72)
35
(Table 12a - C)
The latrines at state and district levels, were essentially
private latrines. At the state level, around 10% of the
respondents reported the existence of community latrines
while at the district level community latrines were reported
by only 1% of the respondents.
Indian Market Research Bureau
124
Details were as follows :
Not
(?□ across)
Base
Community
Private
Both
Specified
State
518
13
83
2
3
Districts
224
1
95
1
2
State
970
11
82
6
1
Districts
734
1
88
11
Dry type
Flush type
(Table 12b-C)
Thus, existence of community latrines was only reported by 5% of
all respondents (n=4418) at the state level and 4% of all
respondents (n=2407) at the district level.
Of all flush type
community latrines, 84% were reported from Tamilnadu.
Of these, 92% of the respondents in the states and 94% in the
districts said that no member of their family used the community
latrine.
Thus, less than 0.5% of the population in the states
and 0.2% of the population in the tracking districts were actually
using community latrines.
(Table 12d (i) -C)
The main reasons for non use of community latrines were essentially
the following :
a/
that community latrines were dirty/badly kept and full of
excreta.
This was reported by 46% in the state level and
21% at the district level, entirely from Amreli, Gujarat.
Indian Market Research Bureau
125
b/
that water was not available for cleaning :
41% at the state level and 14% at the district
level.
c/
that the previous user does not clean the latrine
(state : 11%. district :2%)
d/
that there were no doors, no privacy (state 7%)
district 28%)
e/
that the latrine was broken down and had not been
repaired (state : 1%,
district : 30%)
It must be mentioned that even though 75% of all
community latrines mentioned in the states were
mentioned by Tamilnadu respondents, 95% of these
respondents said that no member of their household
used these latrines.
The majority of state level
complaints mentioned above came from Tamilnadu.
Similarly, at the district level, 87% of those who
mentioned that community latrines had been installed
were from Amreli district of Gujarat.
94% of these
respondents said that no member of their house used
the community latrine and the vast majority of the
district level compalints came from them.
Indian Market Research Bureau
126
3.1.2
Potentia1 of community latrines
In theory, 85% of the respondents, in reply to a direct
guestion, expressed their willingness to use a community
flush latrine.
It is useful here to look at the 15% who had unambigously
negative feelings on the subject since it is human nature
to reply politely particularly when no imminent decision
needs to be taken but only an opinion on future cooperation
Those who said 'no' to such a guestion
therefore had clearly negative views on the subject.
is being sought.
13% of all state-level respondents and 8?6 at the district
level said 'no' (1% at state level did not know and 1% did
not answer).
These were distributed as follows :
Negative response
District
State
4418
2407
%
%
Total (Districts)
13
8
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
11
8
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
8
5
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
15
17
Manipur
6
Tamilnadu
13
Andhra Pradesh
12
Gujarat (Amreli)
8
Madhya Pradesh
20
Base : All respondents
3
(Table 15 - C)
Indian Market Research Bureau
127
Respondents in Madhya Pradesh,in the two Southern states,
West Bengal and Uttar Pradesh held negative views on the
use of community latrines.
Negative views were expressed
by upper income respondents (22%), older respondents (14%)
and literate respondents (16%). Men and women expressed
The main reasons for
negative views in equal proportions,
unwillingness to use were as follows :
State
District
557
195
0'
/O
%
Expected to be dirty and badly kept
39
30
Have a latrine at home
18
28
People are accustomed to outdoors
15
11
Problems of cleaning and maintenance
14
5
Previous user may not clean
12
12
Attitudinal instance to latrine
6
12
Base :
(Refer Table 15(i) - C)
3.1.3
Pre-conditions for success
Since it had been expected that a direct question would
bring in politely positive replies from all but the most
negative respondents, respondents were asked for the
condition that would make for more willing and widespread
use of community latrines. The following conditions were
stipulated.
Vn
MB®
Indian Market Research Bureau
128
States
District
4418
2407
%
%
. Water should be available nearby/
in plenty/tap in latrine
88
88
. Sufficient number of latrines
62
60
. Villagers should keep it clean
42
41
. Government paid cleaner should be
provided
37
35
. Separate latrines for men and
women
27
28
- outside the village, in open
space
29
29
- in the centre of the village
10
11
- in a convenient, specified place
19
26
Base : All respondents
. Situation of latrine :
We will examine differences in responses on the basis of
other demographic criteria.
The emphasis on water availability came essentially from
younger, literate, men (92%).
This same group, particularly
the upper income members of this segment,emphasized the need
for latrines in sufficient numbers.
They also emphasized
the village people would have to keep latrines clean if they
were to be used by other people.
Women, on the other hand stressed the need for separate
latrines for men and women, 31% of the women demanded
this as compared to 24% of men.
©
Indian Market Research Bureau
129
The demand for differences on the basis of sex were again
higher by far in Gujarat than in any other state (65?°).
The second highest demand came from Tamilnadu at 52%.
This was also borne out at the district level where 70%
of Amreli respondents demanded separate latrines for men
and women compared to 27% in Sultanpur and less than 10%
in Udaipur and 24 Paraganas.
In Tamilnadu, 73% of the respondents demanded that govern
ment paid cleaners should be provided.
The other conditions that were mentioned across the states
and districts were that there should be electric light
connection and light in the latrine (4%), that there should
be separate latrines for separate castes (4%), and that
latrines should be repaired when they were out of order (2%).
3.1.4
Acceptability of community latrines
In order to obtain a second opinion on the potential of
community latrines, respondents were asked for their views on
whether community latrines would be used by other people in
their village,
The majority view was that most villagers would
use community latrines.
Details were as follows :
State
District
4418
2407
%
%
Community latrines will be used by most
villagers
84
90
Community latrines will not be used our
village
4
2
Will be used only in emergencies
3
2
Others
3
2
Don't know/Can't say
6
5
Base : All respondents
Indian Market Research Bureau
130
An interesting fact of this response is that negative/
conditional responses were rare at the tracking district
level.
This has to be viewed in the context of their
experience if any with community latrines.
Only 5 respon
dents in Amreli had said that their family members used
community latrines.
.In the remaining three districts,
not a single respondent or his family members had used
community latrines.
At the state level, the highest proportions of negative/
conditional responses came from Manipur and Tamilnadu.
In West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh, on the other hand,
attitudes were most strongly positive while in Madhya
Pradesh, 12% of respondents chose to not answers the
question at all.
9?o of respondents aged 46 years+ said that community
latrines would not be used as compared to 4% and 3% in
the other age groups.
HI D
D
Indian Market Research Borean
=
lEXISTENCE and use oe latrines
9z T
s
8.6z
I
7.7z
87.+
?7.-
^Yxxx:^
t<xxxx;
oZ-
R
E
P
0
feu:
IX. X .X.XA.,:
I
T
I
I 3-zt
M
G
2Z T
KXXXX'
lx?!
L<J
rUN?:LVAX<:
SM
<xxxd
< x X XX i
K>^X>d
■
fox
X?:' ......
■
Wx
I
XXXXx' •••••
17.A. A X. /
0-/N
i ® Exists
XXXXXj;
pXXXX;;
1
1
kx>rx.x?.
UN
r>X>x
•••-•/•.<
X.X.XXa.
8.5z
XXxXX:
___ ^xxnsL ■
ComMunity Latrines
__
Private Latrines
TYPE OF LATRINE
Used
131
3.2
PRIVATE LATRINES
9% of all respondents at the state level and equally at the
district level (n=4418 and 2407 respectively) said that they
had a private household latrine.
3.2.1
Existence of private latrines
Since only one member was
interviewed from any given household,
this can be projected to mean that in these states under study,
9% of all rural households would have a private latrine,
Details by state and by district were as follows :
% having private household latrine
State
District
4418
2407
Total
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
8.6
9.1
4.4
0.7
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
9.2
2.8
West Bengal (24 Parganas)
15.3
25.3
Manipur
81.3
Tamilnadu
8.3
Andhra Pradesh
7.9
Gujarat (Amreli)
8.0
Madhya Pradesh
10.7
Base :
All respondents
7.7
(Refer Table 12c - C)
3.2.2
Usage of private latrines
Where there was a private household latrine, it was almost
universally used.
Thus, 90% of those at the state level who
had a household latrine said that at least some members of
their household used it ; at the district level, 99% reported
usage.
(Refer Table 12d - C)
D
Q
Indian Market Research Bureau
132
In 73% of the households at the state level and 74% at
the district level, private latrine owning households
reported that all members used the latrine.
There were clear variations, however by states and districts
and by demographic variables in terms of the proportion of
respondents who reported all-member usage.
All members use
Districts
State
342
217
O'
O'
Total
73
74
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
55
80
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
78
73
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
64
68
Manipur
98
Tamilnadu
53
Andhra Pradesh
72
Gujarat (Amreli)
92
Madhya Pradesh
99
Base :
/O
zO
96
Only 68% of respondents from lower income households
reported all-member usage compared to 84% from upper income
households.
Similarly, 74% of the younger respondents reported all
member usage compared to 65% of the older respondents.
Among literate respondents, 71% reported all-member usage
but 81% of illiterate respondents said the same.
MB
Indian Market Research Bureau
133
Finally 80% of the women respondents said that all members
used the private latrine; only 66% of the male respondents
said the same. Male respondents tended to say that women,
especially young women were the main users of private
latrines.
Of those who did not say that all members used private
latrines, the major user was reported to be female members
of the household.
Indian Market Research Bureau
134
3.2.3 Cleaning of private
latrines
Private latrine owners were questioned with regard to their
Non-owners
practice in terms of keeping the latrine clean.
were asked about how, in their opinion, the latrine would
be cleaned if they were to build a private household latrine.
Responses are being listed below under the headings 'actual'
and 'hypothetical' which pertain to the former and later res
pendents respectively.
Hypothetical
Actual
State
District
State
District
294*
188
4123
2219
0'
0/
zO
Housewife cleans it/will
33
clean
23
20
21
Each member who uses,
cleans
24
32
34
35
Hire a sweeper to clean
18
12
29
30
1
9
7
20
3
4
Base :
/O
Government will provides a
1
sweeper
Don't know/not asnwered 17
clear that the housewife was expected
In actual practice, it was
and actually did the work of keeping private flush latrines
to
That this was indeed true was reflected in the fact that
clean.
45% of the women said that the housewife cleaned the latrines
compared to 21% of the men who said so at the state level, At
the district level too, 27% of the women said the housewife
cleaned the latrine compared to 19% of the men.
*
Owners here are defined as owners of private flush latrines;
non-owners are those who did not own a flush latrine.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
$^<
e:
9^
CJs
o
Hi IWfH
I ’"'' ’’iTT'" ‘jj-’j*^*
s a:;: s SE
111 T jT X
IS
iimt:
<x
PHI
l2
if) ±
o
-d
,
...........
»■
tj ,
" -' ■
J'*
x:
- - —^d_~^»»-.3»«"~^-~^»».-.«y»^*-
ff
»■— W» '
fl?
x:
Ld
<
tfl
3:
£Z
rti
JX,
ZD
-
Q
BsBSci
j-------
+
<30
<S
cn
CSD
CD
N
x <r
$3
<33
r--
<33
LC
*4*
33
<3D
<3?
CD
h
<33
® w
CZ)
M .
H'
<r z
co
135
3.2.4
Attitudes to private latrines
In order to assess attitudes to private latrines, res-
pondents were asked if they believed that there were
any advantages to having private latrines and if so, to
enumerate these advantages.
All respondents were asked this question, irrespective
of their status in the context of private latrine
ownership.
The majority at both state and district levels (86% and
82% respectively) believed that there would be advantages
of having private latrines.
Details were as follows :
Positive responses
State
District
Base : All respondents
4418
2407
%
%
total
86
82
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
79
74
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
87
65
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
98
97
Manipur
90
Tamilnadu
88
Andhra Pradesh
95
Gujarat (Amreli)
91
Madhya Pradesh
75
94
Indian Market Research Bureau
136
-were found
highest proportion of positive responses
district, in Andhra
in West Bengal and the 24 Parganas
Amreli district. In
Pradesh and in Gujarat as well as
of those who
demographic terms the highest proportion
from the upper income group,
gave a positive response were
Even within
the younger age group and the literate group,
• • income seemed to be the
these parameters, literacy and high
of difference to a positive
two that made the greatest amount
l----
The
attitude.
Both types of respondents, those with a positive attit
as well as those who had a negative attitude were asked to
explain their point of view, in order to understand perceived
advantages and disadvantages of private latrines.
a/
Advantage of private latrines
single largest perceived advantage
Convenience was clearly the
This was expressed in different ways.
of a private latrine.
District
State
Base
3792
1982
0'
0/
zO
/0
monsoon/winter/night/ill-health 38
Useful in
37
Will not need to go out in the open
32
Trouble of walking saved
26
16
17
15
14
14
16
11
8
7
5
6
7
6
6
Time will be saved
Privacy
Cleanliness
Useful in emergency
Useful for children
Convenient
Health will remain good
36
43
HD)
D)
Indian Market Research Bureau
137
Convenience at particular times such as monsoons, winter
etc was mentioned across all states but was particularly
heavily mentioned in Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and West Bengal.
The convenience of not having to ^o out in the open was
mentioned significantly more often by women and by those
who were illiterate.
It was mentioned particularly from
the states of West Bengal, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.
b/
Disadvantages
71?6 of all respondents at the state level and 66% at the
district level said that there were no disadvantages of
private latrines.
Of those who mentioned any disadvantages, the main were as
follows :
State
District
4418
2407
0/
/O
%
Bad smell/bad air
14
13
Having latrine near the house is dirty
8
10
Causes disease
4
3
Needs to be cleaned everyday
3
4
Do not have space near the house
2
2
Flies/mosquitoes
2
3
Base
:
All respondents
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
138
Fear of bad smell was mentioned in Uttar pradesh and Manipur,
particularly by men and by respondents from lower income
households.
The attitude of a latrine near the house being
dirty was also mentioned mainly by Uttar Pradesh respondents.
Here again, lower and middle income groups mentioned it
more than upper income respondents.
It was also mentioned
significantly more often by older and illiterate respondents.
93% of the respondents from West Bengal said that there were
no disadvantages to a private latrine, reflecting a
consistently positive attitude to latrines in West Bengal.
Similarly, 79% of upper income respondents said that there
were no disadvantages, against 69% of the lower income
respondents; interestingly, while more literate respondents
(74%) said that there were no disadvantages, this view was
reflected more by women (74%) than by men (68%).
3.2.5
Interest in construction of a private latrine
Non-owners of private latrines in villages where private
latrines had been installed were asked if they would be interested
in getting a private latrine constructed.
At the district
Only 5% said that they would not be interested,
Details were as follows i
level, only 3% gave a negative reply.
Base : State : 879; District : 612
State
District
LI
MI
UL
L
Literacy
Age
M Older Yes No
Very interested
87
86
83
93
92
85
87
92
88
84
May be interested
7
11
9
3
5
9
7
2
6
9
Not interested
5
3
7
1
1
4
5
5
5
6
Don't know
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
2
1
(% across)
MHI
MW D)
D)
Indian Market Research Bureau
OZ.S sy :
auijqey aqeATJd buijinboe joj Aed
oq buTyjTM yenpiATpuT qunowe abejQAtf
(erpui Tie) Apysqns qAog jo ajeMeup •;
S3JAUS
dW
r»!3
Ml
rm
dV
<in
®9«Eff-+ 9
f ■
i
i
H®!
ii
i
I
I
J
I
I
I
I
1^101
i
i»
4- 91
i
ii
i
+ 93
(3E
■1
3
+ 8^
S
3
; t 8S
7
: T 09
i i
1
H
I
I
1
l
J
ii
I
r
!
i
Ii
Ii
i
I i
I
!<
llBli
i
J
1I
i
I
.HU:
4-Ti
il
I
A
1
a
41
a
Q
3
■
B®
Bos
!
i
i
<
i
i
i
I
|I II 02.
I !
I 08
i i
I 86
I
1 001
|
S3NI^1V”]
I aiYAISd DNI1133 Ni lS3^31Nlj
a
Z
139
It is very interesting to note that the highest number of
'not interested'responses came from Tamilnadu followed by
Manipur, and Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh.
State and
district-wise details were as follows :
(?6 across)
Interested in private latrines
District
State
Yes May be No
Yes May be No
Uttar Pradesh
(Sultanpur)
95
1
4
77
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
91
4
1
88
2
10
West Bengal
(24 Paraganas)
86
12
1
83
15
1
Manipur
90
11
Tamilnadu
82
6
12
Andhra Pradesh
89
3
6
Gujarat (Amreli)
82
15
1
89
10
1
Madhya Pradesh
90
1
9
23
Those who were not interested had the following reasons for
their negative frame of mind.
State
District
O'
/O
0/
Do not have space in my house
36
53 *
Do not wish to spend on a latrine
26
11
Latrine is dirty/cause dirt and bad smell
20
21
Do not have water facility
20
Do not want a latrine near my house
18
Latrine will have to be cleaned
8
Prefer open air defecation
3
/□
16
5
Ml
Indian Market Research Bureau
140
3.2.6
Government subsidy
Those respondents who did not have a private latrine but
had seen private latrines and would therefore be the
primary target group for potential latrine construction
were asked if they were aware of a government subsidy that
was available for private latrine construction.
29% were aware of this while 71% were not,at the state level.
In the tracking districts, awareness was at 30% level.
43%
of Uttar Pradesh respondents expressed awareness as did 35%
from West Bengal and 34% from Andhra Pradesh.
In Udaipur,
41% were aware while in 24 Parganas, 39% expressed awareness.
38% of respondents who were over 46 years of age were aware
of this subsidy.
A greater proportion of those who were
literate (32%) and men (32%) were aware than the illiterate
respondents (22%) and women (23%).
Lowest awareness was expressed in Tamilnadu (15%) and Manipur
(16%).
All these respondents, irrespective of their level of awareness
regarding the government subsidy, were asked to respond to a
question that said "suppose the government would give you
monetary help for building a household latrine and assume that
you also had to spend a certain amount, how much would you be
willing to pay to get a latrine built for your house ?
BUM
Indian Market Research Bureau
co
22
CJ
bO
%£i
o
[mimmm:
Li.1
I
Himntpj:
u3
i
J l-£i_~ i
«§► 5
ww~<».»«wyl- ■■WMMW
I>W —
i
i
b3 trz
U*cvw —
▼■^ tzz
....... .
-
•—--~»•->«• ■c.pimi^ »•w—■
U3 £=
o
i
i*.^nn>
LJ
$0-
CO
~>
m
i <«*m ««n .*» i —■ ■ ■■■
k * **^r* —«X5>
I
r—.'
|whhi»»»i.<ii i i —■■■■<■>■——w i — up
«w—
rt?
CO
^TTTT.Tr.l
CD
cr^
r
w
3
■tr
^0
LJ
is
-yb ■ e
jC
? c\
Ld
LD
CO
P-.
XI
\,D
CD
ruo
O
E-*
---------- |-------
|-------
CD
CD
03
CD
CD
C^
CD
eg
CD
S3
S3
LTJ
<r e: o
IH
<E
h
S3
03
c:
so
CD
<S]
£G
CD
CD
S3
141
On an average, respondents at the state level were willing
to pay Rs 570.
In the tracking districts the average
amount quoted was Rs 481.
State and district-wise averages are given below :
State
Mean (Rs.)_______
District
Total
570
481
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
585
177
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
716
610
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
490
296
Manipur
393
Tamilnadu
516
Andhra Pradesh
667
Gujarat (Amreli)
652
Madhya Pradesh
682
652
In Madhya Pradesh, 23% said that they were not willing to
pay while 28% did not specify any figure at all.
The range of responses were wide and given that there were
no prompts that would suggest expected response to the
respondent,the answers offer interesting insights.
There were 0.7%of all respondents at the state level and
0.8% at the district level who said that they would pay less
than Rs 5.00.
On the other hand, 19% at the state level and
16% at the district level spontaneously said that they would
contribute more than Rs 500.
D)
Indian Market Research Bureau
142
15% of all respondents said that they were not willing
to pay any amount (19% at the district level said the
same).
6% at the state and district levels did not reply to this
question.
Those who said that they were not willing to pay anything
have been studied; details are presented below :
Base: State
District
Not willing to pay
District
State
: 879
: 612
Oz
zO
O’/O
Total
15
19
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
11
43
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
9
24
West Bengal (24 Paraganas)
17
9
Manipur
5
Tamilnadu
17
Andhra Pradesh
11
Gujarat (Amreli)
17
Madhya Pradesh
23
22
Those who were unwilling to pay were also very clearly
in a specific category.
They were from lower income groups,
older age groups and were illiterate.
)
Indian Market Research Bureau
143
Those who were not willing to pay
State
District
O'
/O
0/
/0
Lower
18
24
Middle
11
10
Upper
8
7
Younger
13
14
Middle
16
21
Older
22
24
Literate
12
14
Illiterate
21
26
Men
15
14
Women
16
24
Income
Literacy
Sex
For reasons that are not immediately clear, women in the
tracking districts were less willing to contribute to the
construction of private household latrines than women from
the states as a whole.
The reasons for this lack
of willingness to contribute was
primarily lack of money (81%
and 85% at state and tracking
districts respectively).
3% (2% in the districts) said that they did not wish to spend
on latrines while 4% said that other items were more urgently
required rather than latrines.
5% at the state level and 4% at the district levels sa_Lc
they had no space for latrines.
liMMQ
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
IS THERE A NEED TO CONSTRUCT LATRINES IN VILLAGES ?
r
3
2
i
I
I
All
ffWW?>x
o^^yvyAv
i
i
i
i
MXaxxxK
\A
1^0
!
I
^xxyyXyyx^
Men
1
i
XXXX.
j\>>v
XXXXX^
\'XXV\Z
itlw
I
■lOil
■fcmm
i
I
ifews
^rowW
x^zxXx^KxwM^X
L
I
!
I
Women
WfOWWxX
xJtKXxp?: t’l
t
K
KAA A-Kz^
•/\ ■' * /* z** ' - •’^Sv
' ;■.. ;; .-.: r.
;; ,?s.
I/
y A.-\/\
/\/\,'
-x;; X /\
;.<.;.
>. -ck
'a^aaaaaXX
kVAY/aa'A
^SKysyssjA
pi
I
tx'AAXXxXA
i
i
i
I
I
JI
@ Strong need
H Some need
H No need
ED
Don’t know
EJ Others
if
I
BiSfe&xWXX
^WWv-xx^^
——.'t/ xm*
M
...................... .. .
I
144
3.2.7
Need for latrines in the village
All respondents were asked, finally, if they felt that
current defecation practices were satisfactory or if
there was a need for latrines.
The responses were as follows:
State
District
4418
2407
%
%
Strong need
67
72
Some need
18
16
No need
10
9
Don’t know
4
2
Others
1
1
Base
All respondents
The "no need" response was mainly received from Uttar Pradesh
(17%), Madhya Pradesh (11%), Rajasthan and Tamilnadu (10% each).
In the tracking districts, the highest proportion of"no need"
responses were found in Sultanpur (18%) and Udaipur (11%).
Predictably, those who said that there was no need for
latrines belonged essentially to lower income households,
were likely to be older but only marginally so. There were
significantly more ”no need" responses from the illiterate
respondents (12%) than from literate respondents (8%).
However, it was interesting to note that at the state level,
women expressed a need for latrines while men tended to be
unsure or negative. 69% of the women said that there
RD)
d5
Indian Market Research Bureau
145
was a strong need for latrines compared to 64% of the
men who said so.
21% of men were unsure while 10% were
negative; conversely only 16?o of the women were unsure
while 9?o were negative.
Clearly, women felt the need
for latrines more acutely than men did.
Indian Market Research Bureau
SECTION D : VILLAGE OBSERVATION FINDINGS
TH
Indian Market Research Bureau
146
1.0
BACKGROUND
In both Phase II and Phase III of WESKAP study
a village observation sheet (VOS) was filled for
each village visited in addition to individual
questionnaires . The VOS was designed with a
view to obtain information on certain selected
parameters which would help in profiling as well
as classifying villages.
It was hypothesised
that these parameters would have a bearing on the
village
KAP with respect to water and sanitation.
A classification
of villages on these parameters
would therefore help in identifying the KAP that
its villagers would have regarding water and
sanitation.
The parameters selected by IMRB were :
1.
Demographic
-
Population
Occupation
-
2.
Literacy
Development
Television
Radio
Shops
Electricity
3.
Facilities
Water related
Sanitation related
Iffl D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
147
2.0
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
2o1
POPULATION
As has been explained in the section on sampling,
for any state within each TRMI category the sample
was proportionately selected from the different
- strata categories . This is reflected in the
POP
following table :
Number of Villages
As per Census Estimate
As Estimated by Village
Chief
Districts
States
States
Districts
500
48
12
39
10
501-1000
40
20
44
14
1001-2000
51
32
39
30
2001-5000
60
36
76
32
33
4
34
18
Pop-strata
less than
5001 and
above
(Table 1(a))
Total village covered were
All states
(Districts)
Uttar Pradesh (Sultanpur)
232
33
(104)
(26)
Rajasthan (Udaipur)
32
(26)
West Bengal (24 Parganas)
32
(26)
Manipur
12
Tamilnadu
29
Andhra Pradesh
28
Gujarat (Amreli)
30
Madhya Pradesh
36
(26)
Indian Market Research Bureau
148
It can be observed from the above table that
the sample villages were quite uniformly distri
buted across the different pop-stratas.
Tamil-
nadu and Andhra Pradesh however, exhibit a different
pattern in that
a larger number of villages were
selected from among the higher pop-strata.
As against this in Manipur, most of the villages
selected were in the low pop-strata category. This,
trend basically reflects the size of villages existing
in these states as regards total populationo
IMRB had sampled the village based on the population
statistics of the 1981 census.
However the study was
conducted in 1989 and the population of villageshad
increased.
As a result some villages shifted from
a lower pop-strata to a higher pop-strata as can
be observed from the above table.
lB
Indian Market Research Bureau
149
2.2
CASTES
As regards the number of castes existing in a
village it was found that except for 13 (6)
villages - about 6% of our sample - all other
villageshad more than one caste<, The distri-
button of villages on the basis of the number
of castes existing there is presented below:
Base:
State
District
Number of castes
232
No ’ s
104
states
Districts
17
1-2
3-4
30
29
12
5-6
25
11
7-8
25
15
9-10
28
19
11-12
22
7
13-14
17
7
15 and above
29
12
Not specified
27
4
(Table 1 (b))
Bum
Indian Market Research Bureau
150
The fact that more than 60% of the villages
covered in the different states had 5 or more
castes indicates the presence of a well defined
caste system.
Villages in Andhra Pradesh and
Tamilnadu had a larger number of castes as com
pared to other state.
In Tamilnadu 14 of the
19 villages where this information was obtained
had more than 5 castes . In Andhra Pradesh 21
of the 23 villages had more than 5 castes.
The caste system does not seem to be very strong
in the Eastern states of West Bengal and Manipur.
In West Bengal 17 out of 30 village had 5 castes
or less whereas in Manipur 12 of the 12 villages
had less than 5 castes.
The presence of scheduled castes was not very
strong in most of the villages covered in the study,this
is evident from the following table.
Base
State
232
Districts
104
No' s
Proportion of scheduled castes
States
1-9%
64
25
10-19%
44
30
20-29%
35
15
30-39%
20
12
40% and more
18
4
No scheduled caste
51
18
Districts
(Table 1b)
IW
D)
Indian Market Research Bureau
151
About 22% of the villages covered did not have
any scheduled caste . Of the villages where sche
duled caste existed,in almost 60% of the cases
the proportion of scheduled caste population, to
the rest of the village was less than 20% .
In
Manipur there was no scheduled caste in any of the
12 villages covered by us.
4-
E •-ISO
m-ia3N&ci
M®
Indian Market Research Bureau
152
2.3 OCCUPATION
In the VOS we recorded the three main occupation
of a village.
Farming was the major occupation in most villages
and was reported
by the village chiefs in 218
of the 232 village visited. Of the 24 villages
where farming was not mentioned as a main occupation
5 belonged to West Bengal and 7 to Tamilnadu states.
Other occupationsmentioned were :
Base
States
Districts
232
104
No' s
Main occupation
State
District
Farming
Manual worker/labour
218
103
178
52
76
32
28
15
Service
Business/Trader
Skilled worker/craftsmen
Fishing/Animal Husbandry
41
23
14
11
(Table 1c)
MB D
D
Indian Market Research Bnreao
153
Ih Uttar Pradesh and Manipur ’service’ was
mentioned as a main occupation in a comparatively
of villages - 18 out of 33 in Uttarlarger number
i
i and 7 out of 12 in Manipur, (about 55-58%)
Pradesh
Fishing/animal husbandry was mentioned mainly in
Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat.
As regards occupation, there was a difference in
response as obtained for the state as a whole and
state.
as obtained for a specific district in a
For example in the Uttar Pradesh state sample only
1 of the 33 villagesmentioned skilled workers/craftsmen
as main occupation, As against this,in 7 of the 26
villages covered in Sultanpur district this was a
main occupation. Similarly, whereas fishing/animal
husbandry was mentioned in only 1 village in UttarPradesh state, 6 villages in Sultanpur district
stated it as one of their main occupations.
A somewhat higher number of villages in Sultanpur
Udaipur and 24 Parganas mentioned Business/Trade
as a main occupation compared to Uttar Pradesh ,
Rajasthan and West bengal states.
A possible explanation of this could be the fact
that the districts were not representative of the
state and hence the difference in response.
Indian Market Research Bnrean
154
2.4
LITERACY
Literacy of the village people is of great
as
importance both in helping create awareness
well as acceptance of health and hygiene related
factors.
The literacy levels as obtained for the
different villages were as follows:
Base
States
232
Districts
104
Districts
No j* s
States
Male
Female
Literacy levels
Male
Female
literate
4
16
1-9 %
17
74
7
37
10-19 %
27
57
18
22
20-29 %
38
30
18
14
30-39 ?o
24
21
9
12
40-49 %
25
11
11
6
50-59 %
41
20
13
7
60-69 ?o
24
2
11
1
70-79 ?o
16
9
1
80-89 %
9
90-100 %
7
No
1
4
7
1
( Table 1d )
As may be observed from this table, In case of the
were guite good,
male population literacy levels
although more improvement is reguired. On an overall
basis* in 42 % of the villages covered by us, 50 % or
Indian Market Research Bureau
155
or more of the male population was literate.
However the picture is pathetic when we look
at the figure for female literacy.
In 90 % of the villages covered by us, the pro
portion of literate female was below 50 ?□ . This
is very dissappointing, given that women play a
major role in household health and hygiene.
2.5
LANDSCAPE AND LAYOUT
Most of the villages covered in our study were
located on Flat ground - 148 out of 232. About
one fourth of the villages - 58 in number - were
located on a hilly terrain. Gujarat, Manipur and
West Bengal had a higher proportion of villages
located on a hilly terrain - 17 out of 30 in Gujarat,
5 out of 12 in Manipur and 12 out of 32 in West Bengal,
This can be observed from the following table :
Base
States
232
Districts
104
No' s
Village landscape
State
District
Flat ground
148
54
Hilly ground
Sloping ground in one
58
40
direction
Others
Not specified
22
2
2
10
( Table
8a )
Indian Market Research Bureau
156
As regards the layout of the houses in a village
IMRB supervisors were asked to draw a description
on whether the house were spaced out or not, whether
these were grouped into mohallas and whether these
mohallas were caste based.
The descriptions obtained
were :
Base
States
232
Districts
104
No ’ s
State
District
Close together
151
69
Spaced out
72
35
Not specified
9
Layout of village houses
( Table 8b )
Scattered around the village 101
43
Grouped in Mohallas
61
124
Not specified
7
( Table 8d )
In Andhra Pradesh,and Gujarat the houses in most of the
As against this most of
villages were close together
the villages in Manipur had houses spaced out.
This was also evident in the observation that houses
in most villages of Manipur were scattered around
and not grouped into mohallas.
Indian Market Research Bureau
157
Interestingly in a majority of cases the houses
or mohallas were structured on a caste basis.
The following table shows this :
Base
States
Districts
232
104
No' s
States
Districts
Yes
118
53
No
Not specified
82
43
32
8
Are Mohallas caste based
( Table 8e )
The caste based structure of mohallas was very
prevalent in the state of Andhra Pradesh , where
in 21 out of the 24 villages covered,
it was found
In Manipur there was no caste based structuring of
houses.
Indian Market Research Bureau
158
2.6
CLEANLINESS
The villages covered by us did not fare badly
as regards cleanliness. Cleanliness covered such
areas like - slush and garbage on the streets,
condition of roadside drains and cleanliness of
village houses.
The observations made are presented
in the following table:
Base
States
232
Districts
104
No' s
States
Districts
A lot of slush on the streets
57
39
A little slush on the streets
109
45
Almost no slush on the streets
61
14
Not specified
5
6
lot of garbage on the streets 87
A little garbage on the streets 103
47
Almost no garbage on the streets 38
4
Not specified
12
Level of cleanliness
A
44
1
Mostly all open drains on the
street
134
84
Some open drains on the street
22
9
Almost no open drains
48
10
Not specified
28
1
( Table 8f )
HI D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
159
The above table indicates that most villages
were generally dirty ie,. had slush and garbage on
the roads,
However these were not very dirty also as
the quantity of slush or garbage was only a little.
This is quite good given the fact that most villages
do not have any
organised system of garbage or waste
water disposal - like a common sweeper etc.
As regard waste-water drains , villages in Rajasthan
and Gujarat had very few open drains - 5 out of 32
in Rajasthan and 7 out of 30 in Gujarat.
As against
this villages in West Bengal and Manipur mainly had
open drains
- 31 out of 32 in West Bengal and 10 out
of 12 in Manipur.
As far as the village houses were concerned the
observations made about their cleanliness were as
follows:
Base
States
232
Districts
104
No' s
States
Districts
Most houses clean,swept, neat
63
12
Some houses clean, some dirty
129
71
Most houses dirty with flies
33
20
Not specified
7
1
Village houses
( Table 8g )
D
0
Indian Market Research Bureau
160
As may be observed in most villages some houses
were clean and some dirty, However in a very high
number, of villages in Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu
most of the houses were very clean - 13 out of 28
in Andhra Pradesh and 13 out of 29 in Tamilnadu.
w
Indian Market Research Bureau
161
3.0
WATER RELATED FACILITIES
3.1
EACILITIES EXISTING
The findings obtained from the villager questionnaire
have shown that handpump and dugwell are the most
often used water sources for various purposessuch as
drinking, cooking etc,. This trend is also reflected in
the water sources as existing in the different village^.
Base
State
232
District
104
No’s
Water source existing
Stat£
Private Public
Dugwell
121
Handpump
Pond/Lake
Private
Public
131
66
56
83
166
64
88
4
123
66
74
37
66
35
Canal
River/stream
Taps
Mechanised Tubewell
Districts
37
66
8
16
53
30
29
17
( Table 6(b) & 15 )
As can be observed - dugwell, handpump and pond/lake
were the more common sources of water. 51 villages
across all states did not have a handpump, of these
10 belonged to the state of Manipur and 13 to Rajasthan.
(Refer table 6 (b) ).
Indian Market Research Bureau
162
If we study the pattern of water source available
across the states, Manipur emerges as being very
different from the rest of the states, of the 12
villages covered in this state, none had a dugwell
tubewell.
or a mechanised tuoewen.
The main
water source
available were natural sources like river/stream
and pond/lake.
Mechanised tubewells was mainly found in the UttarPradesh villages where 26 out
mechanised tubewell.
of 32 villageshad a
It should also be noted here,
that across all states, mechanised tubewells were
mostly private.
3.2
NUMBER OF HANDPUMPS AND TAPS EXISTING
Just knowing whether a water source exists in a
village or not, does not tell us whether the village
has an adequate supply of water.
For this it becomes
necessary to find out the number of such sources
that are available to the villagers for use.
In this study we had confined ourselves to studying
the availability
of handpumps and taps in specific.
The information collected is presented overleaf :
©
Indian Market Research Bureau
Private
Public
163
Base
States
83
166
Districts
64
88
No' s
District
State
Private
Public
Private
Public
1-5
33
101
9
50
6-10
11
24
9
21
11-20
10
28
13
11
21-50
10
10
12
4
51-100
6
1
9
2
101 +
12
Not specified
1
Number of Handpumps in village
11
2
1
(Table 6 (c) )
As can be observed from the above table the number of
private handpumps existing in a village was 5 or less
in almost 40% of all villageshaving private handpumps.
This indicates that only a few people in these villages
enjoyed the benefit of water supply from a private hand-
pump.
As regards public handpumps also,the total number existing
in a village was 5 or less in almost 61% of the cases.
However this is not surprising since one public handpump
is used by a large number of villagers.
The number of public handpumps varied depending on the
population size*of the village.
This is evident by the
fact that 84% of the villages in the below 2000 pop-strata
had 5 or less public handpump.
The corresponding figure
for 2000 + pop-strata villages was 33% .
BW D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
164
Similar information was collected regarding piped
water taps. The findings are presented below.
Base
State
District
Private
public
37
66
8
16
No' s
Districts
States
Name of private taps
1-5
6-10
11-20
21-50
51-100
101 +
Not specified
private
public
23
14
2
11
8
3
1
6
1
4
5
1
1
private
public
4
4
3
5
5
16
6
1
3
( Table 6 (c) )
find that more than half
If we study the above table we
of the v illagesthat had private taps had 101 + taps.
However in case of public taps, more than half the village
had less than 10 public taps, This trend is guite similar
to that observed in case of private and public handpumps.
/
Indian Market Research Bureau
165
3.3
TYPE OF HANDPUMPS
Another question in the VOS pertained to the make of
the handpumps
that were installed in the village.
We did not study in detail the different types of hand
pumps that were installed in the village^
Instead,
handpumps were broadly classified into Mark II vs Tra
ditional type. The following table presents the findi-
ngs.
Base
Private
Public
States
83
166
Districts
64
88
No ’ s *
District
State
Mark of Handpump
Private
Public
Private
Public
II
57
142
28
64
Traditional
73
33
62
29
Other
4
Mark
1
( Table 6 (d) )
As may be observed from the above table, majority of
the private handpumps were of the Traditional type
whereas majority of the public handpumps were Mark II
types.
This was to be expected as the government has
been mainly installing Mark II handpumps over the past
few years.
* In the table, the column figures add upto more than
the base because in any one village there could be both
Traditional as well as Mark II type handpumps.
SI Q
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
166
3.4
CONDITION AND MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC HANDPUMPS
IMRB’s supervisors were asked to record their
assessment of whether the public handpumps
installed in the village were functioning pro
perly and were well maintained.
The assessment made by the IMRB team revealed
the following :
Base
State
District
167
88
No' s
Numb er of handpumps functioning
1-5
6-10
11-20
21-50
51-100
Not specified
State
District
77
37
18
20
13
6
1
52
6
6
1
19
( Table
7a )
If we compare the table with the table in section 3.1
showing the total number of public handpumps existing in
the village covered by us, it seems that in most
cases the handpumps were functional. This indicates
that public handpumps were in most cases well maintained .
HI D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
167
This is further corroborated when we look at the
hand
assessment made about the condition of
pump platforms which is presented below:
Base
State
167
Districts
88
No' s
Condition
of handpump platforms
Hardly any platform is
States Districts
cracked
or broken
70
30
Some platform are cracked/broken
24
16
Most platforms are cracked/broken
28
13
Handpumps do not have platforms
45
29
(Table 7b )
As may be observed from the table,in most cases
where public handpumps had platforms these were
in good condition.
The fact that public handpumps were much better
maintained as compared to community latrines is
also reflected in the fact that the villagers were
more involved in their maintenance .
This is very
clear from the following table:
Indian Market Research Bureau
168
Base
States
167
Districts
88
No ’ s
State
District
53
25
49
Panchayat Samiti
Villagers themselves/mechanic residing
31
in the village
39
Mechanic residing outside the village
31
22
Municipality
1
Others
8
Not specified
6
Who takes care of public handpumps
Government appointed caretaker
22
( Table 7 e )
Unlike the case of community latrines where
a
fairly high proportion of village chiefs had responded
'Nobody maintains', for public handpumps there was
greater involvement
of villagers either directly or
through the panchayat samiti.
A possible explanation for this would be that the need
for a water source is much stronger than that for a
Hence public handpumps are both used as well
as maintained much better than a community latrine.
latrine.
Ml
Indian Market Research Bureau
169
However despite a greater interest and involvement
in the maintenance of public handpumps
not much
attention was paid to the drainage of waste water
from these handpumps.
This is evident from the
findings shown in the table given below :
Base
States
167
Districts
88
No' s
State
District
Forms a slush around the HP
82
43
Drains off into a soak pit
22
13
Drains off into the field
21
9
Drains of into a lake/pond
13
18
Drains off into a tre^bush
5
2
Drains off into a roadside drain
4
1
Others
9
2
Not specified
11
Excess water from the handpump
( Table 7c (i) )
As may be observed, proper drainage method like use of a
soak pit or a roadside drain were mentioned only in a few
villages.
In most cases the water just stagnated in the
vicinity of the handpump .
This could be because
of a lack of awareness on the importance of maintaining
cleanliness around a water source.
Bffl D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
170
3.5 QUALITY OF HANDPUMP WATER
The quality of handpump water was quite good in
case of most of the villages visited by our team.
Quality of water was judged by its visual appearance,
taste and smell.
The observations made be IMRB
supervisors are presented in the following table .
Base
States
Districts
167
88
No' s
State
District
Very clear, no dirt or suspended
impurities
No suspended dirt but water is
112
66
not very clear
Water has rust/reddish colour
33
14
16
visible
14
6
Others
Not specified
2
1
7
1
Visual Appearance
11
Dirty water, suspended impurities
( Table 7d )
Quality of water
was not very good in Manipur and
Uttar Pradesh. In Manipur 2 out of the 2 villages
having a public handpump mentioned problems of' rust
in water. In Uttar Pradesh 13 out of 21 villages
mentioned problems of dirt/rust in water
JU
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
171
Next we assessed the smell of the handpump
water :
States
Districts
Base
167
88
No ’ s
State
District
No smell
140
77
Bad smell
18
10
Others
Not specified
3
Smell of handpump water
'«•<
6
( Table
7d )
In most villages the water did not have any smell
in it.
Once again the exception was Manipur,where
in both the villages the handpump water had a bad smell.
In West Bengal also in 6 out of 26 villages the hand
pump water had a bad smell.
(
IMRB supervisors also tasted the handpump water in
each village and then recorded their comments on it.
Their comments are presented in the following table:
Indian Market Research Bureau
172
Base
States
167
Districts
88
Taste of handpump water
State
District
Sweet
57
Salty
100
43
24
Iron taste
24
24
Brackish
19
15
Tasteless
7
Stale
4
9
4
3
Others
Not specified
1
8
( Table 7d )
The problem of salty water was mainly in the southern
states of Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh - 16 out of 24
villages in Tamilnadu and 11 out of 24 villages in
Andhra Pradesh. In Manipur the water tasted like iron
and was brackish.
Indian Market Research Bureau
173
4.0 SANITATION RELATED FACILITIES
4.1
FACILITIES AVAILABLE
As regards facilities related to sanitation
the areascovered by the VOS were - space
available for outdoor defecation, the existence
of latrines- private vs community, their usage,
maintenance and overall condition. The infor
mation obtained is presented in the following
section.
In about half of the villages visited,the village
chiefs were of the opinion that there was enough
land available for outdoor defecation by people.
This is evident from the following table.
Base
State
District
232
104
No's
State
District
defecation
Scarcity of open land for
134
49
defecation
Not specified
90
8
54
1
Response
Enough land available for
( Table 8 (h) )
Indian Market Research Bureau
174
Scarcity of open land for defecation was more
strongly felt in the state of Rajasthan and
Andhra Pradesh - 21 of the 32 villages in Rajasthan
and 14 of the 28 villages in Andhra Pradesh mentio
ned this problem.
Community latrines were installed in a comparatively
smaller number of villages. Private latrines existed
in a much larger number of villages,
-
not surpri
sing considering the fact that even if one household
in the village had a private latrine the village
would be counted as having private latrines.
The
information obtained is presented.
Base
State
232
District
104
No ’ s
Existence of latrines
States
Districts
Community
47
10
Private
145
58
( Table 4 (a) 5 (a) )
Indfam Maricet Itaeartb Bureau
175
Tamilnadu emerged as one state where a very large
number of the villages had community latrines- 23
out of 29.
In contrast to this, not even a single
village in Manipur state had community latrines.
Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh were the two other
states where a reasonable number of villages reported
the existence of community latrines - 9 out of 32
and 28 villages respectively.
In other state only
1 or 2 villages had community latrine.
The picture was quite different in case of private
latrines.
In Manipur state all of the 12 villages covered
had at least one private latrines* Uttar Pradesh and
Madhya Pradesh were the two states, where a compa
ratively lower number of villages had private latrines
14 out of 33 and 15 out of 36 respectively .
IwtiM Mwfcet Itattrcb Bwcm
176
4.2 USE OF EXISTING FACILITIES
The existence of community latrines does not imply
that the villagers are making use of these.
This is brought out very clearly by the information,
obtained on the usage and maintenance of community
latrine where these were installed.
Base
State
47
District
10
No' s
Usage of community latrine
State
District
Not being used by anyone
22
3
Being used by some people
11
2
Being used by most people
6
2
Not specified
8
3
(Table 4 (b))
As can be observed,in fairly large number of villages
community latrines were not being used at allf Of the
village where such latrine were
being used very often
only some people were using these .
Interestingly enough,the incidence of non-usage was
highest in Tamilnadu - 17 out of 23 villages- which
happens to be the one state with the largest number
of villageshaving community latrines.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
177
4.3
REASONS FOR NON - USAGE OF LATRINES
Possible reasons for non-usage could either be
difficulty or problems associated with the use
of community latrines such as - location, clean
liness etc., or a mental block /lack of interest
towards using these latrine.
To understand this
we looked at these aspects also.
It was found that in most cases the community latrine in a village were not maintained properly
This can be
and were dirty or non-functional .
observed from the table below :
Base
State
47
District
10
No1 s
States
Districts
Dirty/badly kept
19
2
Broken down/non-functional
8
3
Well maintained
8
2
Not specified
12
3
Condition of community latrines
(Table 4 (b) )
Non-usage of community latrines could be due to
their bad maintenance^ On the other hand, if no one
is using community latrines their maintenance will
obviously be neglected, Therefore bad maintenance
cannot be solely blamed for the non-usage of community
latrines.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
178
We thus studied the location of community latrine
in the villages where these were installed 0
The
findings were :
Base
State
47
District
10
No ’ s
States
Districts
23
7
Located outside the village boundaries 13
1
Location of community latrines
Located within village boundaries
All latrines constructed at one place
5
Separate latrine for different
mohallas/castes
6
2
12
2
Not specified
(Table 4 (b))
Looking at the above table it seemsthat location
of community latrines in terms of distance should
not be a problem.
This is so because for outdoor
defecation also, villagers normally go outside
the village boundaries.
Indian Market Research Bureau
179
A hypothesis we had was that the non-usage
of community latrines was because of a lack of interest
on the part of villagers.
corroborated when
Base
This hypothesis is somewhat
we study the table presented below:
State
47
District
10
No ’ s
Maintenance of community latrines
States
Districts
Not maintained by anyone
17
3
Maintained by govt paid sweeper
12
1
Maintained by a sweeper appointed
by the villagers
3
Maintained by the villagers
themselves
3
Not specified
12
5
(Table 4 (b))
It is very clear from this table that in most cases
the villagers were not involved or concerned about the
maintenance of the community latrines installed in
their village.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
180
4.4
PRIVATE LATRINES
Although a fairly high proportion of the villages
covered in our sample had private latrines the
number of houses having private latrine in most of
the villages were not many.
This shows that a
small segment of the rural rich had constructed
such latrines in their houses. This is evident from
the following table :
Base
State
145
Districts
58
No' s
Number of private latrine
State
Districts
1-2
22
6
3-4
20
6
5-6
8
6
7-10
16
8
11-20
13
7
21-30
18
8
31-40
5
41-60
8
2
61-100
9
7
101 +
22
7
Not specified
4
1
(Table 5 (a) )
As may be observed from the above table in almost
30% of the villages having private latrines the number
of such latrine was less than 5 .
The total number of
private latrine was less than 20 in case of more than
half of the villages that had private latrine.
rw D)
Indian Market Research Bureau
181
The villages of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh
had a comparatively lower number of private latrines.
This is evident by the fact that 11 out of 15 villages
in Madhya Pradesh had less than 5 latrines. In case
of Uttar Pradesh 8 out of 14 villages had less than
5 private latrines.
Villages in
Manipur had a higher
number of latrines with 6 out of 12 villages having
more than 100 latrines.
As regards the type of latrine - ie.,water seal vs
dry type - existing in the villages, the findings
were
State
145
District
58
Base
No' s
Type of private latrine
States
Districts
Mainly water seal type
75
36
Mainly dry type
65
14
Same of both type
3
4
Not specified
2
4
( Table 5 (b) )
As is evident from the above table, a comparatively
higher number of villageshad water seal type of latrine
as against the dry type.
water seal latrine is
This is very encouraging as
more hygenic as compared to the
dry type.
Indian Market Research Bureau
182
Statewise difference did exist as regards the type
of latrine installed.
Most of the villages in
Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh and Tamilnadu had water seal
type of latrine - 17 out of 18 in Gujarat, 15 out
of 18 in Andhra Pradesh and 17 out of 22 in Tamil Nadu.
In contrast to this, most villages in Madhya Pradesh,
Manipur and West Bengal had dry type of latrine -
11 out of 15 in Madhya Pradesh, 12 out of 12 in Manipur
amd 15 out of 25 in West Bengal.
The water seal latrine installed in most villages had
a single pit and only few had double pits, as is shown
in the following table.
Base
State
78
District
40
Type of water seal latrines
States
Districts
Mainly single pit
50
19
Mainly double pit
19
18
Approximately same of both
1
2
Not specified
8
1
( Table 5 (b) )
Indian Market Research Bureau
183
5.0
DEVELOPMENT RELATED FACILITIES
5.1
EDUCATION FACILITIES
A good finding of the VOS was that about 88 ?o
of the villages in our sample had at least one
school as can be seen from the table given below:
Base
States
232
Districts
104
No' s
States
Districts
Yes
205
95
No
27
9
Existence of school
( Table 10 )
Uttar Pradesh emerged as one state where a com
paratively lesser number of villages had schools 23 out of 33 ( about 70 % )
However in most cases only a primary school existed
in a village as is obvious from the following table:
Base
States
205
Districts
95
No' s
Type of School
State
District
Primary School
177
81
Middle School
76
32
High School
40
14
24
2
Adult
Education Centre
Not specified
1
( Table 10 )
Indian Market Research Bureau
184
An interesting observation here is that a Primary
School also was not existing in all the villages
that had some education centre.
In most cases the number of such educational institutions existing in a village was 1-2 and not more.
This is very clear from the distribution of Primary
Schools in our sample villages.
Base
States
177
Districts
81
No ’ s
State
District
1
2
3
120
30
14
60
15
2
4
4
2
5
2
6 and above
6
Not specified
1
Number of Primary Schools
2
( Table 10 )
1
Indian Market Research Bureau
185
5.2
OTHER FACILITIES
The other facilities that we looked at were electricity
connection and existence of shops supplying basic con
sumption
material like food, clothing, medicine etc.
The findings are presented.
Base
States
232
Districts
104
No ’ s
Electricity connection
State
District
Yes
181
67
No
22
37
( Table 9 )
As may be observed,about 10% of the sample
villages did not have electricity connection,
differences also existed.
Statewise
All the villages covered in
Tamilnadu and Gujarat had electricity connections.
In West Bengal, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh a somewhat
lesser number of villages had electricity connection
14 outof 32 in West Bengal, 19 out of 32 in Rajasthan and
20 out of 33 in Uttar Pradesh.
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
186
Even if a village had electricity connection
it did not necessarily imply that most houses
in that village would have electricity. This
is brought out clearly when we look at the number
of houses having electricity connections in diffe
rent villages :
State
District
Base
181
67
No' s
State
District
70
30
51 - 100
30
5
101
150
13
6
151
201
200
9
3
250
300
8
8
2
5
350
5
3
3
3
3
2
24
5
7
3
Number of houses with electricity
50
Upto
251
301
351 - 400
401 - 450
451
500
501 and more
Not specified
1
( Table 9 )
As may be observed in almost 55 % of the villages
having electricity connection,not more than 100
houses had electricity.
1
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
187
Our next area of interest was the existence
different type of shops in a village,
of
Our findings
here are presented below.
Base
States
232
Districts
104
Type of shops existing
State
District
Small/paan/bidi/tea shop
164
75
Provision store
169
71
Ration/Fair price shop
98
51
Cycle repair/mechanic shop
88
38
Vegetable/fruit shop
53
19
Textile shop
50
25
Restaurant/Hotel
47
12
Liquor shop
41
4
Medicine/chemist shop
36
12
Durable goods type
13
5
Others
63
32
No shop
22
5
( Table 13 )
Some interesting observations can be made from the
table.
As is obvious, provision stores and paan/bidi
shops were found in most of the villages,*. However,
medicine/chemist shops existed in a few villages
only - even less than restaurant/hotels.
IB
Indian Market Research Bureau
188
The fact that about 10 % of the village
had no
shops whatsoever is indicative of the economic
dormancy of that village*
It is our hypothesis that the low mention of vege-
table/fruit shops could be because of the fact
that most villagers grow their own vegetables.
The low existence of textile shops indicated that the
villagers in most cases have to purchase clothes from
outside the village - either from a bigger town or in
the village melas
5.3
MEDIA EXPOSURE
T.V and radio are the two mass media
which the Gove
rnment .and other voluntary agencies are using extensi
vely to educate villagers about various health and
hygiene related factors.
It was therefore considered
important to study the extent to which these villages
were exposed to these media*
The findings are presen
ted below :
Base
States
232
Districts
104
Media Exposure
State
District
Yes
175
73
No
57
31
Reception of T.V transmission ?
( Table 11a )
Indian Market Research Bureau
190
The number of T.V sets existing in the different
villages are presented in the following table :
Base
States
175
Districts
73
No' s
State
Number of T.V sets
Total
District
Private Commu-
Total Private Commu
nity
nity
None
24
35
129
4
5
57
1
33
25
40
16
16
15
2-3
25
25
3
16
15
1
4-5
22
24
1
8
8
6-7
13
9
2
4
4
8-10
11
14
9
10
11-20
24
21
8
9
21-50
8
9
7
5
51-100
7
7
1
1
101 +
8
6
( Table 11a )
The first interpretation
that can be made from this
table is that majority of the villages where a community
set existed had only one such set.
Infact
more than half
of the villages having T.V sets had a total of 5 T.V sets
or less - including both household and community sets.
0)
Indian Market Research Bureau
190
The number of T.V sets existing in the different
villages are presented in the following table :
Base
States
175
Districts
73
No' s
State
Number of T.V sets
Total
District
Private Commu-
Total Private Commu
nity
nity
None
24
35
129
4
5
57
1
33
25
40
16
16
15
2-3
25
25
3
16
15
1
4-5
22
24
1
8
8
6-7
13
9
2
4
4
8-10
11
14
9
10
11-20
24
21
8
9
21-50
8
9
7
5
51-100
7
7
1
1
101 +
8
6
( Table 11a )
The first interpretation
that can be made from this
table is that majority of the villages where a community
set existed had only one such set.
Infact
more than half
of the villages having T.V sets had a total of 5 T.V sets
or less - including both household and community sets.
Indian Market Research Bureau
191
This indicates that even though a fairly high proportion
of villages could receive T.V transmission, the number
of T V sets was very low in these villages,
Hence it
can be interpreted that only a small segment of the
villagers were exposed to T.V .
The second media that we studied was Radio.
The number
of villages possessing a radio or transistor
are pre
sented below :
Base
States
232
Districts
104
No' s
Radio sets existing
State
District
Have
radio set
221
96
Have
private radio set
218
96
Have
community radio set
46
16
( Table 12 )
Unlike the case
with T.V sets most of the villages - 95%
had a radio set.
Here too, only 20% of the villages also
had community radio sets.
Gujarat and Manipur were the
two states where all the villages covered had a radio set.
Once again Uttar Pradesh was the only state where not a
single village had a community radio set.
HD
D)
Indian Market Research Bureau
192
Next we studied the number of radio sets existing
in different villages to assess the extent to which
the villages were exposed to this media.
The findi
ngs are presented in the following table :
Base
States
232
Districts
104
No' s
District
State
Number of radio
Private
Total
Comm-
Total
Private
unity
nity
sets
Comm-
None
11
14
186
8
8
88
Upto 5
13
17
43
8
9
16
6-10
27
25
3
9
9
11-20
18
17
9
9
21-40
22
21
11
11
41-60
29
28
10
10
61-100
21
23
17
17
101 +
89
87
32
31
Table 12 )
As regards ownership of radio sets, the picture was better
as compared to T.V sets.
As can be observed almost half
of the villages possessing a radio set had more than 4 such
radio sets private
&
community combined .
However in
villages where community radio sets existed the number was
usually not more than one.
From the above discussion it emerges that villagers were
more exposed to radio as compared to T.V.
Indian Market Research Bureau
APPENDIX I
SAMPLING METHOD
The sampling method which was adopted is described in this
section.
Selection of study areas (for Phase III)
Based on a number of previous studies conducted in Rural
India, it was hypothesized that areas which are economically
better developed would differ from less developed districts
with respect to social and cultural practices.
It was also hypothesized that two major factors would be strong
discriminators to explain differences in KAP with respect to
Water and Environmental Sanitation between geographical areas.
These were
a/
The extent of assured water availability in the
district
b/
The level of literacy
If it were shown that in a Rural economy heavily dependent
upon agriculture such as India's, assured water availability
and literacy are strongly correlated with overall economic
development, this would further strengthen the argument that
different levels of economic development would be a meaningful
way of stratifying the study areas.
We therefore undertook the following statistical analysis for
seven of the eight states proposed for the study.
(Adequate data for Manipur were not available).
no
D)
Indian Market Research Bureau
ii
Average ?o
of cropped
land that
is irrigated
Average
% of
literacy
Coeffi
cient of
deter
mination
State
Average
TRMI
Average
rainfall
(in cms)
per year
Uttar Pradesh
29.1
98.5
35.5
23.9
.48
Rajasthan
15.6
56.3
16.7
17.1
.60
Madhya Pradesh 14.4
113.7
8.4
21.0
.09
Gujarat
29.1
83.6
14.1
35.3
.39
Andhra Pradesh 32.2
89.1
34.0
22.8
.54
Tamilnadu
53.8
100.7
46.5
39.4
.50
West Bengal
38.5
188.2
21.0
32.0
.33
The co-efficient of determination provides the extent of corre
lation between the three ’independent' variables defined earlier
and the 'dependent' variable i.e the TRMI.
The analysis shows that except in the case of Madhya Pradesh,
as much as between 33% and 60% of the variation in levels of
development is explained by differences in assured water
availability and literacy.
Since these are also the variables that would, a priori,
also explain differences in KAP (especially in a year of drought)
on the subject of water and environmental sanitation, a strati
fication of study areas by overall levels of development based
on a development indicator such as the TRMI was considered to
be appropriate.
Each state was, therefore, broken down into districts falling
into three categories :
TRMI Index range between
A & B Category
40.00 — 100.00
C & D Category
20.00 — ‘39.99
E Category
Upto 20.00
)TD
lb
Indian Market Research Bureau
The total number of such districts in each of the selected
states are as follows :
____ District categories
A and B
C and D
E '
Uttar Pradesh
9
34
13
Rajasthan
1
6
19
Madhya Pradesh
1
5
39
Gujarat
2
12
5
Andhra Pradesh
6
11
5
Tamilnadu
7
4
4
West Bengal
7
3
3
Total
33
77
88
Within a district category, e.g
A & B, within a state,
the sample size was 100 men and 100 women,
At 95?6 level
of confidence, this provided us with acceptable levels of
precision for a KAP study.
As described in Appendix II (sampling error and Confidence
limits) the expected error range around a 10% estimate
would be + 8.5% and around a 50% estimate, would be + 14.25%
on a sample size of 100 at 95% level of confidence using
the cluster sampling method.
However, for the tracking study, the sample size was
reguired to be higher.
For instance a minimum 'cell' size
of 300 would be needed to detect a shift in any aspect of
*
Manipur : Adequate data about Manipur was not available to
construct the TRMI. However, since all 6 districts of Manipur
are classified as 'backward' we are treating it as an 'E'
category area.
D
Q
Indian Market Research Bureau
iv
KAP from (say) a 10% level in the baseline study to a 20%
level at the tracking study at 95% level of confidence.
This means that the total sample size would need to increase
threefold.
However, since KAP are parameters that change
slowly and almost imperceptibly, it was decided that larger
sample sizes would be used,
A sample size of 600 which
would enable detection of a 5 % shift on a basic estimate
of 10% was decided upon for each ’tracking’ districts.
Four tracking districts were selected in a series of
consultations with the client, and the tracking districts
sample size was a total of 2400.
District category
State
Total
__A + B
Men Women
Uttar Pradesh
600
100
Rajasthan
600
Madhya Pradesh
C 4- D
Men Women
Men
E____
Women
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
600
100
100
100
100
100
100
Gujarat
600
100
100
100
100
100
100
Andhra Pradesh
600
100
100
100
100
100
100
Tamilnadu
600
100
100
100
100
100
100
West Bengal
600
100
100
100
100
100
100
Manipur
200
100
100
Total
4400
800
800
700
700
700
700
The total sample size for this stage of the study was therefore
6800 respondents.
Bffll D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
V
1.
Plotted the Thompson Rural Market Index (IRMI) for 190
districts in the 7 states.
The TRMI is a widely accepted
development indicator which is computed on the basis of
as many as 10 different economic indicators.
It classifies
each district into one of 5 types (A through E) based on
the value of the Index.
2.
Obtained data for each of these districts on
average rainfall in centimeters over the past 20 years
the percentage of total cropped area that is irrigated
and
the percentage of the population that is literate.
The first two variables define the extent of assured water
availability in the district.
(See Appendix IV for a map
of the country showing districts with assured water availa
bility ).
3.
Conducted a multiple correlation analysis between the TRMI
and the three variables defined in '2' above to determine
the extent of correlation between assured water availability,
literacy and overall development (TRMI).
Given in the table below are the results of this exercise for
all districts of the state taken together.
DM®
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
vi
Selection of village
The sampling procedure involved the following procedure
for each district group (A + B, C + D, and E) within a
state
the total sample size was allocated between three
village population strata : below 500, 500-2000,
2000-5000 and over 5000.
the total number of villages covered were arrived at
by dividing the sample size for the stratum by the
average 'cluster size' per village.
The average
cluster size was 12 male and 12 female interviews per
village.
Each 'group' comprised one or more districts.
The
District Census Handbook which provides village level
census data formed the sampling frame for village
selections.
The relevant District Census Handbooks
were notionally arranged in a contiguous manner.
The villages appear in running pages, by police station/
block, and have a serial number.
Effectively, each
village in each district in the region was given a
running serial number.
This running serial number
was the selection basis.
At first, the starting point was selected randomly
(using a random number table).
The district census
summaries indicate the total number of villages in ;a
given populaation stratum within in a region.
Given
1® D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
vii
the number of villages to beselected and the total
number existing, the interval of selection for circular
systematic sampling was determined. From the starting
point (i.e serial number), every n^^1 village in the
concerned population stratum was selected, where n is
the interval as determined above.
For example, if there were 100 villages in the 5001+
stratum in a certain region, and 5 villages were to be
selected, then ever 100 - 20^ 5001+ village was
eligible for selection?
For every village selected, the
immediately next village which exists (in the same
population stratum) was also selected as a substitute.
The procedure outlined above was carried out for each
population stratum separately.
Selection of respondents
In each selected village, the respondents (24 in number)
were selected as follows :
i/
The total number of households in the village
were obtained from the Patwari/Sarpanch/Mukhya
ii/
The village was judgementally segmented with 3
or 4 distinct areas
iii/
In each such area a household was randomly selected
as a starting point.
MW
Indian Market Research Bureau
viii
i
iv/
Starting with this household, the interviewer followed
the Right Hand Rule* and contacted very n
household,
where n is the interval obtained by dividing the total
number of households in the village by the sample size.
The total sample was equally spread across the male and
female segments.
*
The Right Hand Rule of field movement predetermines the
the households tht will be selected and thus precludes
any discretion on the part of the interviewer in the
selection of a household.
Indian Market Research Bureau
ix
APPENDIX II
SAMPLING ERROR AND CONFIDENCE LIMITS
1.
random sampling
Simple
Sampling Error :
Any percentage estimate obtained from sample surveys is
subject to sampling error.
An estimate of the standard
deviation ((F*: sigma) is referred to as the sampling
error.
In the case of a a simple random sample, the
standard error is calculated as :
P (100-p)
n
Where P = estimated percentage
n = sample size
Ex : Let 60% of 400 respondents use Brand A.
Hence
n
400
P
60
Standard error
/60(100-60)
7 400
2.45%
2.
Confidence limits around an estimate :
Simple random sampling
Often in market research one has to state the findingwith
a certain degree of confidence.
A 95% level of confidence
is the one mostly used in sample surveys.
In 95 out of 100
cases an estimate would lie within a range of + 1.96
limits on an estimate are called the 95%
Thus, 1.96
limits.
confidence limits.
Indian Market Research Bureau
X
Ex : from a random sample of 400 respondents, 60% were
found using Brand A.
Then the 95% confidence limits (CL)
on this estimate are :
CL
+
1.96
P
n
6O?6
P(100-P)
n
400
+ 4.8%
CL
Hence at the 95% level of confidence we can conclude that
the true value of the usage of Brand A lies between 55.2% and
64.8% (i.e 60% +
4.8%).
This is valied in the case of simple
random sampling.
3.
Cluster sampling
The sampling error for a given sample size in the case of
a simple random sample is not the samefor the same sample
size obtained through a clustered sample (e.g selecting a;
certain number of villages and selecting respondents in
each).
The sampling error is greater in the latter case
implying that in a clustered sample the effective sample
size is lower than if it were to be treated as a simple
random sample.
The ratio of the sample sizes of the clustered sample
and the simple random sample, both having the same
sampling error, is known as the Design Effect (Deff) :
Deff
Sample size of clustered sample
Effective sample size of simple random
sample
JU
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
xi
Def'f can be determined by using the formula :
Deff
1 + (b-1)
Where b
the number of interviews conducted in each
cluster i.e the cluster size
the intra-class correlation coefficient
which is a measure of the homogeneity
within clusterSv
It can be defined as
the average coefficient of correlation
between all members of all clusters in
the sample design.
To convert sampling errors calculated by methods valid for
simple random sampling (as in Item 1) into the sampling
errors appropriate to clustered sampling the sampling error
is multiplied by the
Design Factor =
However,
Deff
can only be determined, in the proposed sample
design, on a post hoc basis. Empirical data on the likely
values of
for a survey in rural India are not available.
An indication of the impact of clustered sampling are
illustrated below :
Illustration 1 : Design effect
The effect of various values of
on Design Effect for
two different cluster sizes.
Indian Market Research Bureau
xii
Intra-class correlation
0.10
0.05
(°
Cluster size
oToT
10
1.09
1 .45
1.90
2.80
20
1.19
1 .95
2.90
4.80
0.20
Illustration 2 : Effective sample size
The effect of various values of p
on effective sample
size for two different cluster sizes are given below :
Actual
sample
size
Cluster
size
100
10
90
70
50
40
100
20
85
50
35
20
Thus, if
___ Intra-class correlation
0.10
o“oT
0.05
e
0.20
0.05 and the cluster size is 10, the
effective sample size (in terms of simple random sampling)
for an actual sample size (clustered sampling) of 100 is 70.
In this study the cluster size per village was approximately
12 i.e about 12 interviews per village.
Since we do not have any empirical evidence relating to the
likely value of
in the Indian rural context, for the
sake of illustration a
value of 0.1 could be assumed to
observe the impact on sampling errors,
The next section
indicates the sampling error for the various sample size at
the socio-cultural regional level.
HI
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
xiii
4.
Sampling error : Cluster sampling
Cluster size
12
Level of confidence
93%
Regional
sample
size
% error
range around
10% estimate
% error
range around
50% estimate
100
8.5
+ 14.2
150
+ 6.9
+ 11.6
200
+ 6.0
+ 10.0
300
+ 4.9
+
450
4.0
8.2
6.7
The error has been calculated using the formula (for 95%
confidence limits)
Sampling error
Where
=
Design factor X 1.96 X
P
the estimate
n
sample size
Design factor
Design effect
Design effect
1
Where b
f
P(100-p)
n
(b-1) f
cluster size
12
intra-class correlation = 0.1
Hence the Design factor
1
(12-1) 0.1
2. 1
1.45
Indian Market Research Bureau
xiv
APPENDIX III
SAMPLING REQUIREMENTS FOR A TRACKING STUDY
1.
As described in Appendix II the sampling requirements for a
tracking study would be different from a single KAP
study.
This is because the purpose of the tracking
study would be to detect shifts in KAP over time
at an acceptable level of precision.
This is
explained in following paragraphs.
2.
At the 95% level of confidence, the two percentage
estimates (one relating to the benchmark study
and the other to the'tracking' study) should differ
by atleast 1.96 times' the sampling error to yield
a significant difference.
The higher the sample
sizes, the less would be the likelihood of smaller
differences in the percentage estimates being
significant.
If :
PI
is a percentage estimate from the first study
N1
is the sample size of the first study
P2
is a percentage estimate from the second study
N2
is the sample size of the second study
Then :
Standard error (Pl-Ps)
Where P
P(100-P)
1
N1
1
N2
N1P1 + N2P2
N1 + N2
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
XV
If P1 -P2 is greater than 1.96 times the Standard
Error (SE), then we can conclude that the two
estimates are significantly different at the 95%
level of confidence.
3.
Given this, let us take a look at the standard errors
for various sample sizes and estimates.
The standard
error is being multiplied by the Design Eactor of 1.45
as in Appendix II.
Ihis will correct for thefact
that cluster sampling will be used,
The significance
relates to a 95?6 level of confidence.
The results of
this exercise follow :
Whether P1-P2
significant
N1
P1
N2
P2
1.96 SE
a/
100
10%
100
15%
13.3
NO
b/
100
10%
100
20?o
14.3
NO
c/
200
10%
200
15%
9.4
NO
d/
200
10%
200
20%
10.1
NO
e/
300
10%
300
15%
7.6
NO
f/
300
10%
300
20%
8.2
YES
g/
400
10%
400
1 5%
6.6
NO
h/
500
10%
500
15%
5.9
NO
i/
600
10%
600
15%
5.4
NO
J/
900
10%
900
15%
4.4
YES
These calculations broadly indicate that to accurately
monitor changes of 5% around an estimate of 10%, a minimum
sample size of 900 (as in (j) above) would be required.
If the change is 10?o around an estimate of 10%, a minimum
sample size of 300 (as in (f) above) would suffice, This
is true for a 95% level of confidence.
D
D
Indian Market Research Bureau
xvi
APPENDIX IV
MAP OF INDIA
SHOWING Dxsimcrs v/ith assured water availability
Areas of Assured
^:c
.1
Water Availability
---- 1 s'-'K—
As
AB®
s
z
EK
"
■-'/A;
'A—
4-------------
Mki
Note . Districts which receive onnuol normol
M
romfoll of 1150 millimetres ond obove
ond/or hove 50% or more oreos
under irrtgotion ore regarded os
Ci
A
f
______
N
districts with assured water availability.
MV
K\-
K
Pal1'
v 0?
Td\X
Indian Market Research Bureau
- Media
14383.pdf
Position: 2256 (4 views)