Article Type: Research Article Article Citation: Adewole W.A., Ayoade A.R., Olaniyi O.A, and Oladapo E.O.
(2021). ASSESSMENT OF WATER SANITATION FACILITIES UTILIZATION AMONG THE RURAL
HOUSEHOLDS OF SOUTHWESTERN NIGERIA. International Journal of Research
-GRANTHAALAYAH, 9(3), 301-308. https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v9.i3.2021.3567 Received Date: 17 February 2021
Accepted Date: 31 March 2021 Keywords: Water Sanitation Households Rural The study examined
the water sanitation facilities utilization among the rural households of south
west Nigeria. The study specifically described the socio-economic
characteristics of the rural household heads; identified various sources of
water supply and their providers; examined the rural household heads’ knowledge
of water source contamination; examined respondents’ awareness of adequate
water treatment methods and the awareness of waterborne disease. The population
of the study comprised of all the rural households in Ondo and Oyo States in
Southwestern of Nigeria. The sampling procedure employed was multistage
sampling technique to select 355 household heads comprising a total of 167
rural household considered out of 278 rural households from the selected cells
in Oyo state while a total of 188 rural household heads selected out of 314
rural household heads from the selected cells in Ondo State for the study. The
data for the study were analyzed with descriptive statistics such as frequency
count, percentage, mean and standard deviation while inferential statistical
tool such as logistic regression analysis model The mean age of the
respondents from Ondo State was 47 years while that of respondents from Oyo
State was 45 years. Rain water collection was the major source of improved
water supply from Ondo State (87.4%) and Oyo State (86.7%). In both Ondo and
Oyo States, the knowledge of water source contamination is still on moderate
level. Households in Ondo State (WMS = 2.98) and Oyo State (WMS = 2.91) were
more aware of boiling of water as the major adequate water treatment methods.
In both states, the awareness of adequate water treatment methods is still on
moderate level. In both States, the awareness of water-borne diseases is still
on moderate level, majority had favourable attitude
towards utilization of water sanitation facilities while the level of
utilization of water sanitation facilities is still on moderate level. The
result of the Regression analysis model indicated that years of schooling (t=-3.758***;
p=0.000) and households’ size (t=-2.089**; p=0.037) were significantly related
to utilization of water sanitation facilities. It was therefore concluded that the
utilization of water sanitation facilities was influenced by income level,
knowledge of water source contamination, awareness of adequate water treatment
methods, awareness of water-borne diseases, household size. The local council
being the agency saddled with water provision, should be more empowered in terms
of resources and facilities in order to be able to do their work of water
provision and water sanitation information dissemination effectively.
1. INTRODUCTIONWater covers more than two-thirds of the
earth’s surface, but mostly salty and undrinkable. The available freshwater
resource is only 2.7% of the available water on earth but only 1% of the
available freshwater (in lakes, rivers and groundwater) is accessible. Most of
the available freshwater resources are inaccessible because they are in the
hidden part of the hydrologic cycles (deep aquifers) and in glaciers (frozen in
the polar ice), which means safe drinkable water on earth has very small
proportion (3%) in the freshwater resources. Freshwater can also be obtained
from the seawater by desalinization process. In some countries, sufficient
freshwater is not available (physical
scarcity). In some countries, abundant freshwater is available, but
it is expensive to use (economic
scarcity). In almost every region of the world, the
demand for freshwater has continued to increase while accesses to the required
quantity and quality of the resource have been on the decline (UNEP, 2000). The
central role of water is evident in any systematic appraisal of life-sustaining
requirements. Even at the most fundamental level of human survival and
sustainable development, water not only has life sustaining qualities, but
strongly influences economic activity (both production and consumption) and
social roles. UNWATER (2006), estimates that 50% of the world’s population
lacked access to safe sanitation while 20% lacked access to safe drinking
water. Accessibility of people to safe drinking water and sanitation is crucial
to sustainable development, and has great implications for socio-economic
growth and development. Human rights to water, public health and the
environment, are also key index and crucial components of sustainable
development (Moe and Rheingans 2006). Inaccessibility
of people to safe drinking water and sanitation and the disparities can have a
great impact on the health and well-being of vulnerable and the disadvantaged
groups in the society, most especially, the children who are from poor
households and the rural women (UNICEF, 2013). If the health, physical and
emotional well-being of the members of the community is not in good shape,
sustainable development will be elusive to the world over. Water and sanitation
have great and significant impact on poverty-related phenomenon; therefore,
sustainable development cannot be possible in an atmosphere of poverty which
translates to poor living and unhealthy condition of the people (Sarmento, 2015). Over the past decades, there have been various concerted efforts
aimed at meeting basic water supply requirements of Nigeria. Despite these
initiatives, it is estimated that a considerable percentage of the Nigerian
population still lack minimum access to potable drinking water supply, improved
sanitation and Hygiene (Water Sanitation Project (WSP), 2011). The
government of Nigeria has failed to successfully deliver sustainable and
equitable access to safe, adequate, improved and affordable water supply to
most the of population over the years. Nigeria has the lowest life expectancy
of around 47 years of age for adults in West Africa. This has been attributed
to lot of health issues in the country, principally because of lack of access
to safe drinking water, improved sanitation and hygiene (AfDB, OECD, UNDP,
2014). One out of every five children born in Nigeria may die before reaching
the age of five due to the many health risks (World Population Review, 2014).
Also, the country is one of five countries in the world which together accounts
for half of under-five deaths, with Nigeria at 13% (World Bank, 2013).
Therefore, sustainable water supply would improve health and social wellbeing
in the country. The problem of providing WATSAN facilities and services
in Nigeria is probably challenged due to a nexus of factors including; natural,
political, economic, and social among others.
There is great evidence to suggest that, Nigeria is blessed with many
natural water bodies such as rivers, streams, lakes among others that could be
harnessed and used for both domestic and industrial purposes. However, the
availability and accessibility of improved water for domestic consumption is
yet to be achieved especially in the rural areas of Nigeria. This is because
the provision of improved water sanitation facilities is generally seen as
expensive enterprise for both government and donor agencies alike (Oclo, 2011 and Agyemin, 2011). 2. METHODOLOGYThe study
was carried out in Oyo and Ondo States in Southwestern geopolitical Zone of
Nigeria. The zone has six (6) states which are Oyo, Osun, Ondo, Ekiti, Ogun,
and Lagos. The zone is located in the south west geographical zone of Nigeria.
The zone lies in equatorial rainforest belt and the rainfall around this area
varies from 1500mm to 1800mm per annum. They have distinct wet season from
April to late October and dry season from November to March; the areas have a
mean annual temperature of 26.2 degree Celsius, the humidity is high between
July and December and low between December and February. The main occupation of
the people is farming and farms are semi-commercial units, which largely rely
on rainfall as main source of water supply. A
multistage sampling technique was used in selecting a total of 167 rural
household in Oyo state while a total of 188 rural households from the selected
cells in Ondo state. This implies that a total of 355 rural household formed
the sample size for this study. Primary
data were collected from rural household’s heads in South-western Nigeria. The
data were collected with the use of well-structured interview schedule. The data for the study were analyzed with descriptive statistics such as
frequency count, percentage, mean and standard deviation while inferential
statistical tools such as logistic regression analysis model was used to test
the hypothesis of the study. 3.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTSThe
distribution of respondents by age revealed that 8.7% were less than or equal
to 8.7%, 21.7% were between 31 and 40 years, 38% were between 41 and 50%, 20.6%
were between 51 and 60 years of age while 11% were above 60 years of age.
Majority (69%) were male while 31% were female. 10% were single, majority (82%)
were married, 2.8% were divorced, 2.3% separated while another 2.8% were
widowed. 60.3% were Christians, 39.7% were Muslims. According to level of
education, 21.7% did not have formal education, 36.6% completed Primary School,
31.3% had Secondary education, 2.5% attended College of Education and
Polytechnic while 5.4% attended University. 4.2% had 1 and 2 household size,
16.9% had 3 and 4, 54.4% had between 5 and 6 while 24.5% had above 6 household
size. A little below half (48.5%) were Farmers, 31.8% were traders, 8.5% were
Civil servants, 10.1% were into Artisanship while 1.1% belong into category of
unspecified others. Table 1: Socio-economic Characteristics of Respondents
Source: Field Survey, 2020 3.2. KNOWLEDGE OF WATER SOURCE CONTAMINATIONTable 2
shows the distribution of the respondents by their Knowledge of water
contamination identified in the rank order include: bathing/washing clothes at
water source (WMS=2.75), Indiscriminate
use of fetcher (WMS=2.71), Do not have separate bucket or rope at the
well/using dirty bucket (WMS=2.66), Poor storage practices (WMS=2.56). The
animals can go into the water source. No fence/broken fence around the pond and
No cover/lid to protect the well (WMS=2.53), Trash fallen into the water source
(WMS=2.30), Dispose trash near the water source (WMS=2.22), Urinate/Defecate at
the water source (WMS=2.19), Not properly plugging in the holes of the water
pipe (WMS=2.04), Water that does not flow/stagnant water body/pond (WMS=1.99),
Collection of acidic rain (WMS=1.95), Then well has no walling (WMS=1.90) and
Washing raw meat and raw fish near the water source (WMS=1.87) and Latrine
close to the water source (WMS=1.69) Table 2: Distribution of Respondents by Knowledge of Water Source Contamination
WMS = Weighted Mean Score Source: Field Survey, 2020 3.3. AWARENESS OF ADEQUATE WATER TREATMENT METHODSBase on
the result in Table 3. the adequate
water treatment methods in the rank order of awareness as identified from the
results are Boiling of water (WMS=2.94), Let it stand and settle and Use of
Alum (WMS=2.92), Appropriate hand washing behaviours
(WMS=2.78), Strain it through a cloth (WMS=2.77), Defecating in toilets/latrines
(WMS=2.76), Add bleach/chlorine (WMS=2.70), Burning of garbage to control flies
(WMS=2.69) and Solar disinfection (WMS=0.59). The
result of the finding therefore revealed that boiling of water was the most
common and the adequate water treatment methods known among rural households in
the selected States. Boiling of water before use may be associated with fact
that the method is simple, easy to implement and effective outcome without the
usage of sophisticated equipment. Moreover, adoption of any of the available
water treatment methods could go a long way in preventing many waters borne
diseases and death of rural households. In conformity with the present research
finding, Cairncross and Valdmanis (2006) established that the spread of water-
borne diseases can be contained by improved sanitation and hygiene. In the same
vein, some scholars (Curtis and Cairncross, 2003; Fewtrell et al.,
2005; Clasen et
al., 2007) claimed that information, such as hand washing, sanitation,
water treatment and safe drinking water storage have each been proven to reduce
diarrhea rates by 30–40%. Similarly, WHO
(2014) noted that millions of children have been saved from premature death and
illness related to malnutrition and preventable water-borne diseases resulting
in a reduction in incidences of diarrhea, better maternal health, care for
new-born and that adults in general now live longer and have healthier lives. Table 3: Distribution of respondents by awareness of Adequate Water Treatment Methods in pooled data
Mean () = 24.50; S.D = 2.369 WMS = Weighted Mean Score Source: Field Survey, 2020 3.4. AWARENESS OF WATER-BORNE DISEASETable 4
showed the distribution of respondents by awareness of water-borne diseases.
Based on the result in the Table 4.10, the awareness of water-borne diseases in
the rank order of awareness as identified from Oyo State include diarrhea (WMS
= 2.01), cholera (WMS = 1.99), guinea worm (WMS = 1.95), malaria (WMS = 1.90),
typhoid (WMS = 1.79), scabies (WMS = 1.74), schistosomiasis (WMS = 0.46) and onchoceriasis (WMS = 0.35). The finding therefore indicates
that rural households in the selected States were confronted with diverse
water-borne diseases of which diarrhea was identified as the most prominent of
them due to consumption of unhygienically sanctified water (poor water and
sanitation). The finding therefore indicates that rural households in the selected
States were confronted with diverse water-borne diseases of which diarrhea was
identified as the most prominent of them due to consumption of unhygienically
sanctified water (poor water and sanitation). In line with the finding of this
study, UN (2003) affirmed that many developing countries, as much as 80% of illnesses are
linked to poor water and sanitation conditions. Similarly, it is estimated by
some agencies (UNEP/UN-HABITAT, 2009) that half of the world's hospital beds
are filled with people suffering from a water-related disease. Conversely,
WHO/UNICEF (2009) opined that nearly 1 out of every 5 deaths under the age of 5
worldwide is due to a water-related disease. Child mortality according to UNDP
(2010) is considered higher amongst households with poor access to clean water
and sanitation facilities. Table 4: Distribution of respondents by awareness of Water-Borne Disease
WMS = Weighted Mean Score Source: Field Survey, 2020 3.5. LEVEL OF UTILIZATION OF WATER SANITATION FACILITIESThe utilization
of Clean and covered containers was ranked highest among utilized water
sanitation facilities with a weighted mean score (WMS) of 2.92. Others in their
rank order include use of Soapy water (WMS = 2.91), hand washing (WMS = 2.90),
boiling (WMS = 2.86), protected well (WMS = 2.78), improved sewage containers
(WMS = 2.73), hand pump (WMS = 2.60), point of use water treatment with
additives (WMS = 2.56), borehole (WMS = 2.45), public stand pipes (WMS = 1.03),
solar disinfectant (WMS = 0.90), filter technology (WMS = 0.85), hand
sanitizers (WMS = 0.75) and Ultraviolet filtration device (WMS = 0.62). The use
of clean and covered container was the major method used by the respondents in
the southwestern Nigeria. The use of clean and covered containers could help
reduce adulteration of water source thereby reducing incidence of water-borne
diseases. This finding indicates that utilization of water sanitation
facilities will go a long way in reducing incidence of water-borne diseases. In line with the present finding, Centers for
Disease Control (2014) claimed that majority of household water treatment and
storage, including: filter technologies, point-of-use water treatment with
chemicals additives (for example sodium hypochlorite-based water treatment systems),
ultraviolet filtration devices, solar disinfection, boiling, and modified or
improved water storage containers. Table 5: Distribution of respondents by utilization of Water Sanitation Facilities
WMS = Weighted Mean Score Source: Field Survey, 2020 Hypotheses Testing 3.6. INFLUENCE OF SELECTED SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF
RESPONDENTS ON THE
UTILIZATION OF WATER SANITATION FACILITIES
H01:
There is no significant relationship between selected socio-economic
characteristics and level of utilization of water sanitation facilities. The result of the Regression analysis
model in the Table 6 indicated that years of schooling (t=-3.758***; p=0.000)
and households’ size (t=-2.089**; p=0.037) were significantly related to
utilization of water sanitation facilities. Household size indicated inverse
and significant relationship with utilization of water sanitation facilities at
5% significant level, implying that the probability of utilization of water
sanitation facilities decreases with an increase in household size. The odds
ratio in favour of utilization of water sanitation
facilities decreases by the factor -0.249 as the household size is increased by
one member. An increase means few households’ members contribute to households’
water provision through utilization of water sanitation facilities which could
be due to financial incapability. The likely explanation is that in an area
where households depend on large water supply, increasing household size
(active members) results in increased water consumption which might make them
utilize available water supply source without must consideration of safety of
water leading to not utilizing water sanitation facilities. The
coefficient of years of schooling was also inverse indicating that there is
inverse relationship between years of schooling and utilization of water
sanitation facilities. Years of schooling is significant at 1%. The odds ratio
in favour of utilization of water sanitation
facilities decreases by the factor -0.124 for a unit increase in the years of
schooling. This result could be because education offers more exposure and that
could limit their consumption of water or utilization of water facilities like
borehole instead of the utilization of multiple water sanitation facilities. Table 6: Summary of regression analysis model showing relationship between socio- economic characteristics of respondents and households’ food security level
Mean squares=48.739; F=5.415; R=0.210; R-Square=0.044; Adjusted
R-Square=0.036; Std. error of the estimate=3.000 S=Significant, NS=Not Significant ***=Significant at 1% level, **=Significant at 5% level Source: Data Analysis, 2020 4. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONIt was therefore concluded that the utilization of water sanitation facilities were influenced by income level, knowledge of water source contamination, awareness of adequate water treatment methods, awareness of water-borne diseases, household size. Since the local government council is saddled with the main responsibility of water provision according to the federal government of Nigeria and the main findings of this study, the local council should be more empowered in terms of resources and facilities in order to be able to do their work of water provision and water sanitation information dissemination effectively. SOURCES OF FUNDINGThis research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. CONFLICT OF INTERESTThe author have declared that no competing interests exist. ACKNOWLEDGMENTNone. REFERENCES [1] Moe, C. L., and Rheingans, R. D. (2006) Global challenges in water,
sanitation and health. Journal of water and health, 4(S1), pp.41-57. Monitoring
Programme on Water Supply and Sanitation. WHO/UNICEF [2] Sarmento, D. R. (2015). An Analysis of
Access to Improved Drinking Water and Sanitation and Distance to the Water
Source in a Newly Independent Country, Timor-Leste: Assessing Geographical and
Socioeconomic Disparities (Doctoral dissertation, ScholarWorks@
Georgia State University). [3] UNEP, (2000). Global Environmental
Outlook 2000, UNEP Earth Scan 1997, UK. [4] UNICEF (2013). Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) for Water Supply and Sanitation. 2013
update. ISBN 978 92 4 150539 0. [5] UN-WATER, (2006). Water for wealth
creation and health environment. [6] WSP (2011) Economic Impacts of
poor sanitation in Africa. [Online] Water and Sanitation Program [7] World Bank (2013).
Timor-Leste-Country partnership strategy for the period FY2013-2017. World
Bank: Washington, DC.
This work is licensed under a: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License © Granthaalayah 2014-2020. All Rights Reserved. |