In 2015, African ministers established the Ngor Declaration to achieve universal access to adequate sanitation and hygiene services and eliminate open defecation by 2030. Realizing this target will require significant public and private investment. Over the last two decades, there has been increasing recognition that sanitation programs should be demand driven, yet limited information exists about how much rural residents in developing countries are willing to pay for sanitation improvements. This paper applies the contingent valuation approach to evaluate how much households in rural Senegal are willing to pay for a ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrine. The analysis uses data from 1,635 household surveys that were conducted in 47 rural communities across four regions in Senegal. The willingness to pay model found that respondents were more willing to pay for a VIP latrine if they had plans to improve their existing latrine, lived in districts located nearer to the capital city of Dakar, were dissatisfied with their existing sanitation service, and were male. The analysis also indicates that the current household contribution of 5% of the costs of constructing a VIP latrine could be increased to 30% with only a modest decline in the number of households willing to pay this amount.

## INTRODUCTION

More than 2.4 billion people lack access to an improved sanitation facility, and the majority of these people are poor and live in rural areas (UNICEF & WHO 2015). In Senegal, only 40% of the rural population has access to improved sanitation, with rural sanitation being the only sub-sector in the country significantly below the MDG targets (WSP 2011). Addressing the sanitation challenge will require dedicated public and private resources combined with a strong political will that elevates sanitation in national policies and programs.

In May 2015, the Ministers and Heads of Delegations responsible for sanitation and hygiene in Africa adopted the Ngor Declaration on Sanitation and Hygiene in Dakar, Senegal, to ‘[a]chieve universal access to adequate and sustainable sanitation and hygiene services and eliminate open defecation by 2030.’ (AfricaSan 2015). This outcome aligns with the targets under Goal 6 of the proposed Sustainable Development Goals that also call for ‘the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management’ (UN 2014, p. 12). The challenge in realizing these goals in Senegal, and Africa in general, will be to find innovative ways to encourage or enable local communities to participate in improving their access to sanitation services and eliminate open defecation.

Investments in sanitation services have suffered from poorly designed programs that promote technically or culturally inappropriate technologies that households do not use (Mara et al. 2010). Such misjudgments concerning the nature of consumer demand in the sanitation sector of developing countries are frequent and stem from a lack of data on existing levels of services, residents’ priorities, and/or their demand for different sanitation services.

Large-scale sanitation programs often involve a donor or government subsidy. To set the design cost, it is necessary to estimate the amount most households are able and willing to pay for improved sanitation, and the likely level of subsidy available (Cairncross 1992). It is surprising that few studies have addressed existing demand for sanitation in Africa (Whittington et al. 1993; Altaf & Hughes 1994; Jenkins & Scott 2007; Rahji & Oloruntoba 2009; Meeks 2012). The Sanitation Directorate in Senegal established a sanitation promotion policy that includes subsidies and awareness raising, yet there is little data on appropriate subsidy levels (WSP 2011). No research was found on the willingness of rural residents in Africa to pay for sanitation facilities, specifically for ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrines, the topic of this paper. Furthermore, there is little quantitative research on the predictors of latrine ownership in Africa.

Without such research, governments and development organizations must estimate what consumers would be willing to contribute for a particular sanitation service. A program funded by the African Development Bank in Senegal to construct 11,000 family latrines (consisting of either a VIP or pour flush latrine), set the household contribution to participate in this program at 5% of the costs of the facility (African Development Bank 2010). In 2009, the Center for Low Cost Water Supply and Sanitation (CREPA), based in Burkina Faso, estimated the cost of constructing a VIP latrine as 180,870 FCFA ($307) (Niang 2009). Therefore, a 5% contribution towards the construction of a VIP latrine would be around 9,000 FCFA ($15). The conversion rate used in this paper was $1 USD = 590 FCFA. At the time of the fieldwork, the conversion rate was$1 USD = 450 FCFA.

The existing research shows a wide range of willingness to pay (WTP) between countries, and that the demand for improved sanitation depends on a variety of factors such as gender, education, assets owned, income, health practices and knowledge, and social networks (Faisal & Seraj 2008; Van Minh et al. 2013; Thanh et al. 2014; Shakya et al. 2015). This variation means that accurate estimates of WTP should be made at the country or regional level.

This paper describes the application of a contingent valuation (CV) method to estimate household demand for one possible sanitation technology, the VIP latrine, in rural Senegal. It also evaluates household level factors associated with the WTP for the VIP latrine.

## METHODS AND DATA

The research presented in this paper was undertaken as part of a larger study on the productive use of domestic water in Senegal funded by the World Bank's Water and Sanitation Program (WSP). The purpose of the larger study was to examine relationships between the productive use of domestic water, poverty reduction, and sustainability (Van Houweling et al. 2012; Hall et al. 2013; Hall et al. 2014). All of the research was undertaken in compliance with the research protocol approved by Virginia Tech's Institutional Review Board (Protocol ID: 09-153). In preparation for the fieldwork in Senegal, the research team was asked by the WSP-Senegal to also collect data on the willingness of rural households to pay for a VIP latrine, a technology of specific interest to development organizations working in the country. The large-scale, empirical nature of the research presented a unique opportunity to develop data on rural demand for VIP latrines. The fieldwork in Senegal was conducted over a three-month period from May to August 2009.

### Sample framework and methods

Of the eight regions located in the Northern and Central zones of Senegal, four were selected for the study (St. Louis, Matam, Diourbel, and Kaffrine) based on an assessment of the agricultural and livestock activity occurring within the regions and the desire to have some variation among the regions in terms of hydrological, geographic, and climate characteristics. The focus on agricultural and livestock activity was due to the emphasis of the larger study on the productive use of domestic water (Hall et al. 2014). In particular, the study focused on small-scale rural piped water systems that obtain water from deep boreholes fitted with electric-powered pumps.

Within the four study regions, 47 rural piped water supply systems were selected based on variation in the reported levels of productive activity supported by the systems –14 in Diourbel, 12 in Kaffrine, 10 in Matam, and 11 in St. Louis. Prior to the main fieldwork, a pilot study was undertaken to test the surveying instruments and WTP module. No substantive changes were made to the WTP module following the pilot, and the surveyors reported no problems with the administration of this module.

The majority (94%) of respondents presented with a required contribution of 8,000 FCAF ($14) towards the VIP latrine were willing to pay this amount. Further, 88, 79, 56, and 45% of respondents presented with contribution amounts of 16,000 FCAF ($27), 32,000 FCAF ($54), 64,000 FCAF ($108), and 80,000 FCAF ($136) were also willing to pay the stated amount, respectively. The WTP model identified five variables that are statistically significant predictors of a respondent's WTP for a VIP latrine (Table 2). First, the bid value was important. The higher the bid, the less willing a respondent was to pay for a VIP latrine (p < 0.001). Second, if a household had plans to improve its sanitation situation, respondents from these households had 2.7 greater odds of being willing to pay for a VIP latrine than respondents from households without such plans (p < 0.001). Third, households in Diourbel and Kaffrine were more willing to pay for a VIP latrine than in Matam and St. Louis (p < 0.001), even though households in Matam and St. Louis have a higher average monthly income. Fourth, respondents who were somewhat dissatisfied (odds ratio = 2.07, p < 0.01) or not satisfied (odds ratio = 1.76, p < 0.05) with their sanitation situation were more willing to pay for a VIP latrine than respondents who were generally satisfied with their sanitation situation. A higher level of dissatisfaction was also found to be highly correlated with a household's plans to improve their sanitation facility (p < 0.001). And finally, male respondents were more willing to pay for a VIP latrine than female respondents (odds ratio = 1.52, p < 0.01). Table 2 Results of logistic regression predicting WTP for sanitation Odds RatioLower CIUpper CIStatistical Significance (Intercept) 4.60815 2.59277 8.19013 *** Bid 0.99996 0.99995 0.99996 *** Plans to Improve Sanitation 2.73111 1.97882 3.76939 *** District–Kaffrine 1.0535 0.69074 1.60676 District–Matam 0.37919 0.25288 0.56859 *** District–St. Louis 0.31968 0.21657 0.47187 *** Open Defecation 1.17693 0.80734 1.71571 Satisfaction with Sanitation–Somewhat dissatisfied 2.07002 1.26728 3.38124 ** Satisfaction with Sanitation–Not Satisfied 1.76311 1.10894 2.8032 Illness in Past Week–Yes 1.15389 0.8695 1.5313 Household Income 1.00039 0.99995 1.00082 Size of Household 1.01591 0.99667 1.03552 Respondent Education 1.22634 0.79394 1.89422 Respondent Male 1.51564 1.13259 2.02825 ** Odds RatioLower CIUpper CIStatistical Significance (Intercept) 4.60815 2.59277 8.19013 *** Bid 0.99996 0.99995 0.99996 *** Plans to Improve Sanitation 2.73111 1.97882 3.76939 *** District–Kaffrine 1.0535 0.69074 1.60676 District–Matam 0.37919 0.25288 0.56859 *** District–St. Louis 0.31968 0.21657 0.47187 *** Open Defecation 1.17693 0.80734 1.71571 Satisfaction with Sanitation–Somewhat dissatisfied 2.07002 1.26728 3.38124 ** Satisfaction with Sanitation–Not Satisfied 1.76311 1.10894 2.8032 Illness in Past Week–Yes 1.15389 0.8695 1.5313 Household Income 1.00039 0.99995 1.00082 Size of Household 1.01591 0.99667 1.03552 Respondent Education 1.22634 0.79394 1.89422 Respondent Male 1.51564 1.13259 2.02825 ** Significance codes: '***' p < 0.001; '**' p < 0.01; '*' p < 0.05; '.' p < 0.1. ## DISCUSSION The average willingness of all households to pay for a VIP latrine was 72,300 FCFA ($123), although this value varied significantly by district. Given that the median monthly household income was 53,100 FCFA ($90) and the lowest district-level average WTP for a VIP latrine was 55,800 FCFA ($95), these values could be treated as a conservative upper bound to what the majority of households would be willing to contribute towards the construction of a VIP latrine. Thus, households may be willing to contribute much more than the estimated 5% of the costs of constructing a VIP latrine and perhaps as much as 30% of these costs.

The majority of the variables found to be associated with a WTP for the VIP latrine aligned with the authors’ expectations and the results of previous studies. Proximity to urban centers makes sense as a predictor of WTP because it entails greater access to sanitation markets, increased exposure to sanitation and hygiene campaigns, potentially higher incomes, and stronger networks with other people who already have latrines (Shakya et al. 2015). The variation of WTP between regions in Senegal may also be explained by other factors such as livelihood differences and remittance flows. The implication of these findings is that VIP latrine programs dependent on household contributions are likely to experience greater uptake in those districts located nearer to the capital city of Dakar.

Although few studies consider gender – e.g., see Van Minh et al.’s (2013) study in Vietnam and Fujita et al.’s (2005) study in Peru – this research found that men were more willing to pay for sanitation than women. This finding does not necessarily imply that women are less concerned with sanitation, and might instead be related to the fact that women in rural Senegal typically do not make the major household decisions or have access to household finances (Van Houweling et al. 2012).

There was some association between open defecation and WTP for a VIP latrine, but this relationship was not statistically significant (odds ratio = 1.18, p > 0.1). Open defecation was highly correlated with dissatisfaction (p < 0.001). Thus, a household's level of satisfaction with their sanitation service and their motivation or plans to build a latrine is likely to be a more useful predictor of their WTP for a VIP latrine than their existing sanitation practices.

Households with a larger number of family members (odds ratio = 1.016) that reported an illness in the past week (odds ratio = 1.15), and that had a respondent who had at least a primary school education (odds ratio = 1.23), were more willing to pay for a VIP latrine, but these findings are not statistically significant (p > 0.1). Thus, respondents either did not make an association between their sanitation practices and family health, or other factors such as their general dissatisfaction with their sanitation situation were driving their decision process.

Household income had a positive relationship with WTP, though it was only statistically significant at the alpha = 0.1 level. It is surprising that there was not a stronger association between some level of economic status and WTP, considering the wide range of income and asset based variables tested in the model and the strong association found in other countries (Seraj 2008; Rahji & Oloruntoba 2009; Van Minh et al. 2013). Along with the higher than expected WTP found among respondents, this result indicates that cost is not the primary constraint for the majority of households surveyed in Senegal to improve their sanitation services.

Research by Guiteras et al. (2015) in rural Bangladesh revealed how subsidies covering 75% of the cost of a latrine led to a 22% increase in latrine ownership compared to no statistically significant increase from a supply-side market access intervention or a CLTS-inspired (community-led total sanitation) community motivation and information program. If Senegal's Sanitation Directorate were to continue its sanitation promotion program and target subsides at VIP latrines, our research indicates that a significant proportion of households may be willing to pay 30% of the construction costs of the latrine. Further, around three quarters (71%) of the households surveyed in Senegal stated a desire to improve their sanitation situation, which highlights the potential demand for a subsidy program targeting a range of latrine options. However, there may still be groups within communities who cannot afford to contribute to the cost of a latrine and full subsidies may be necessary for these poorest households.

### Study limitations

In presenting these results, the authors acknowledge the extensive literature critiquing WTP studies (Cummings & Brookshire 1986; Blamey et al. 1999; Merrett 2002; Hensher et al. 2005). For this study, efforts were taken to reduce the impact of information and hypothetical bias by training the enumerators to clearly and consistently describe the VIP with the support of images. Further, the dichotomous choice method was selected for its relative simplicity and ability to elicit a WTP value with limited bias. However, the authors recognize the potential problem of strategic bias, whereby respondents answer with the intention of influencing a future investment or policy, and ‘yea-saying,’ where respondents answer based on what they think the enumerator would like them to say. In the latter case, two enumerators’ data were removed from the dataset due to a concern that they had been leading the respondent–i.e., all their respondents had accepted all of their bids.

Another limitation of this study is that it only provided respondents with one option: the VIP latrine, a selection that is more technologically advanced (and expensive) than most existing private latrines. National latrine promotion programs should offer households a range of options, including latrine designs that can be built making use of more local materials to increase adoption and reduce the likelihood of affordability constraints. Notwithstanding these concerns, we believe the results from this study provide a good indication of the factors that shape WTP for a VIP latrine in the study districts and can inform the design of sanitation programs in these regions.

## CONCLUSION

Existing data in Senegal indicated that rural households would be willing to pay 8,000 FCFA (or approximately 4.4% of the construction costs) towards the installation of a VIP latrine. This study found that the majority of households surveyed may be willing to pay up to 30% of the costs of constructing a VIP. While many factors must be considered when establishing the level of household contribution towards a sanitation program, this finding suggests households could bear a greater proportion of the construction costs, which could extend the reach of available funds for a national sanitation program. This study also contributes some key factors that explain a household's WTP for sanitation. Respondents were more willing to pay for a VIP latrine if they had plans to improve their existing latrine, lived in districts (Diourbel and Kaffrine) located nearer to the capital city of Dakar, were dissatisfied with their existing sanitation service, and were male.

## ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The research described in this paper was undertaken as part of a multi-country study on the productive use of rural domestic water funded by the Water and Sanitation Program (WSP), World Bank. We would especially like to thank Thomas Fugelsnes for incorporating this study into the scope of the Senegal research. We would also like to thank the staff at IDEV-ic (formerly known as Senagrosol), our main in-country research partner in Senegal, for the significant effort they made in supporting all aspects of the fieldwork. In relation to the data analysis undertaken in this paper, we would like to thank the Laboratory for Interdisciplinary Statistical Analysis (LISA) at Virginia Tech for their statistical assistance. The authors are responsible for any errors or omissions in this paper.

## REFERENCES

African Development Bank
2010
Rural Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Sub-Programme – Phase II. Senegal
.
Project Appraisal Report
.
African Development Bank
,
Tunisia
.
AfricaSan
2015
The Ngor Declaration on Sanitation and Hygiene
,
http://www.wsscc.org/resources/resource-news-archive/africasan-2015-ngor-declaration-sanitation-and-hygiene?rck=d412c7a8dab6b0e8697edfdb7779c479. The Ngor Declaration was announced at the 4th African Conference on Sanitation and Hygiene (AfricaSan) in Dakar, Senegal, May 25–27, 2015
. (
accessed 17 August 2015
).
Akaike
H.
1974
.
IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control
19
,
716
723
.
Altaf
A. M.
Hughes
J.
1994
.
Urban Studies
31
,
1763
1776
.
Blamey
R. K.
Bennett
J. W.
Morrison
M. D.
1999
.
Land Economics
75
,
126
141
.
Cairncross
S.
1992
Sanitation and Water Supply: Practical Lessons from The Decade
.
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, World Bank
,
Washington, DC
.
Choe
K. A.
Whittington
D.
Lauria
D.
1996
.
Land Economics
72
,
519
537
.
Cummings
R. R.
Brookshire
D. S.
1986
Valuing Environmental Goods: An Assessment of the ‘Contingent Valuation Method’
.
Rowman Allanheld
,
Totowa, NJ
.
Faisal
K.
Seraj
B.
2008
Willingness to Pay for Improved Sanitation Services and its Implication on Demand Responsive Approach of BRAC Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Programme
.
Working Paper No. 1. BRAC
,
Research and Evaluation Division
,
.
Fujita
Y.
Fujii
A.
Furukawa
S.
Ogawa
T.
2005
Estimation of willingness-to-pay (WTP) for water and sanitation services through contingent valuation method (CVM) - a case study in Iquitos City, The Republic of Peru
.
JBICI Review
11
,
59
87
.
Guiteras
R.
Levinsohn
J.
Mobarak
A. M.
2015
.
Science
348
,
903
906
.
Gunatilake
H.
Yang
J.-C.
Pattanayak
S.
Choe
K. A.
2007
Good Practices for Estimating Reliable Willingness to pay Values in the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector
.
Asian Development Bank
,
Mandaluyong
,
Philippines
.
Hall
R. P.
Van Houweling
E.
Van Koppen
B.
2013
.
Science and Engineering Ethics
20
,
849
868
.
Hall
R. P.
Vance
E.
Van Houweling
E.
2014
The productive use of rural piped water in Senegal
.
Water Alternatives
7
,
480
498
.
Hensher
D.
Shore
N.
Train
K.
2005
.
Environmental & Resource Economics
32
,
509
531
.
Jenkins
M. W.
Scott
B.
2007
.
Social Science & Medicine
64
,
2427
2442
.
Mara
D.
Lane
J.
Scott
B.
Trouba
D.
2010
.
PLoS Medicine
7
,
e1000363
. Doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000363.
Meeks
J. V.
2012
Willingness-to-Pay for Maintenance and Improvements to Existing Sanitation Infrastructure: Assessing Community-Led Total Sanitation in Mopti, Mali
.
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of South Florida
,
Florida
.
Merrett
S.
2002
.
Water Policy
4
,
157
172
.
Niang
D.
2009
Communication du CREPA [Presentation to the Water and Sanitation Program, World Bank]
.
CREPA
,
Burkina Faso
.
Null
C.
Kremer
M.
Miguel
E.
J. G.
Meeks
R.
Zwane
A. P.
2012
Willingness to Pay for Cleaner Water in Less Developed Countries: Systematic Review of Experimental Evidence
.
Systematic Review 006
.
International Initiative for Impact Evaluation
,
London
.
R Core Team
2014
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
.
R Foundation for Statistical Computing
,
Vienna
,
Austria
.
Rahji
M. A. Y.
Oloruntoba
E. O.
2009
.
Waste Management and Research
27
,
961
965
.
Seraj
K. F. B.
2008
Willingness to Pay for Improved Sanitation Services and its Implication on Demand Responsive Approach of BRAC Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Programme
.
Research and Evaluation Division, BRAC
,
Dhaka
.
Shakya
H. B.
Christakis
N. A.
Fowler
J. H.
2015
.
Social Science & Medicine
125
,
129
138
.
Thanh
N. H.
Van Minh
H.
Huyen
D. T. T.
Chung
L. H.
Hung
N. V.
2014
Use of Contingent Valuation Methods for Eliciting the Willingness to Pay for Sanitation in Developing Countries
.
Vietnam Journal of Public Health
2
,
59
66
.
United Nation Children's Fund (UNICEF), World Health Organisation (WHO)
2015
Progress on Sanitation and Drinking Water–2015 Update and MDG Assessment
.
UNICEF and WHO
,
Geneva
.
United Nations (UN)
2014
Open Working Group proposal for Sustainable Development Goals. Full report of the Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development Goals is issued as document A/68/970
.
United Nations
,
New York
.
Van Houweling
E.
Hall
R. P.
Diop
A. S.
Davis
J.
Seiss
M.
2012
The role of productive water use in women's livelihoods; evidence from rural Senegal
.
Water Alternatives
5
,
658
677
.
Van Minh
H.
Nguyen-Viet
H.
Thanh
N. H.
Yang
J.-C.
2013
.
Environ Health Preventive Medicine
18
,
275
284
.
Venables
W. N.
Ripley
B. D.
2002
Modern Applied Statistics with S
.
Springer
,
New York
.
Water, Sanitation Program (WSP)
2011
Water Supply and Sanitation in Senegal. Turning Finance into Services for 2015 and Beyond. An AMCOW Country Status Overview
.
World Bank, Water and Sanitation Program–Africa Region
,
Nairobi
.
Whittington
D.
Briscoe
J.
Mu
X.
Barron
W.
1990
.
Economic Development and Cultural Change
38
,
293
311
.
Whittington
D.
Lauria
D. T.
Wright
A. M.
Choe
K.
Hughes
J. A.
Swarna
V.
1993
.
Water Resources Research
29
,
1539
1560
.