FACULTY OF HEALTH SCIENCE

TO INVESTIGATE PEOPLE’S ACCESSIBILITY TO SAFE AND READILY AVAILABLE

WATER FOR DOMESTIC USE: A CASE STUDY OF GARDEN HOUSE COMPOUND
LUSAKA ZAMBIA.

BY

LULLY KAPINI
STUDENT NO: 19012879

A REPORT SUBMITTED TO CHRESO UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELORS OF SCIENCE IN PUBLIC
HEALTH

SUPERVISOR: MR MATE MWALE

@ 2023
Declaration

I Lully Kapini, declare that this:

(a) Represents my own work

(b) Has not previously been submitted for a post graduated or any other university.
(c) Does not incorporate any published work or material from another dissertation

Signed:................................................

Date:...................................................
Approval

This report by Lully Kapini, is approved as partially fulfilling the requirements for the
award of Bachelors of Science in public health by Chreso University.

Supervisor...............................................

Date.........................................................

Signature..................................................
Abstract

It is well known that water is a natural resource without which all living things cannot exist.
It is a natural requirement for all living things to have access to water, if they have to be alive.
It is why seventy percent of our planet earth is covered by water, though the world population
is facing water scarcity. Such scarcity of water is urging people to use water from unprotected
sources which the world urban poor and rural population are highly affected by. It is a well-
known fact that ‘water is life’ because it gives life for all. On the contrary, many are dying as
a result of unsafe drinking water. The consequences of unsafe drinking water are in general
negatively affecting the environmental and socio- economic development of a nation.

Access to basic sanitation still remains a big challenge to the urban poor. The combination of
poor accessibility to potable water and basic sanitation is negatively impacting on the
economic, environmental, and social condition of a country. Garden House Compound of
Lusaka is among the many shanty compounds in Zambia experiencing poor accessibility to
potable water and basic sanitation. As it is in many compounds, the people of Garden House
are affected by the problem of water and sanitation.
Dedication

This report work is dedicated to my son and my family, who gave me the moral support and
encouragement and without whose love, patience and prayer, my studies would not have been
possible.
Acknowledgements

I have many people to thank for their support to this effort. Firstly, I am
particularly grateful to Mr Mate Mwale who was my supervisor, provided useful
ideas, critical comments and guidance in writing this report. Secondly, I appreciate
the help rendered by the Resident Development Committee members of Garden
House Compound in authorizing the study and facilitating the household visits.

Finally, I am very grateful to all the respondents who, despite being busy, found
time to be interviewed. This work would not have been possible without them. I
am also grateful to my family and friends for the support and confidence they had
in me which propelled the completion of this effort.
LIST OF ABREVIATIONS AND ACRONOMY

CDC …...................................................................... Center for Disease Control and Prevention.

CSO ...........................................................................Central Statistics Office

CUREC…………………………………………….. Chreso University Research Committee

GT………………………………………… game theory

LWSC................................................................. Lusaka Water and Sewerage Company

MDGs ………………………………………... Millennium Development Goals

PUA ................................................................... Pandemic Unemployment Assistance

SPSS………………………………………… Package for Social Sciences

UN ...................................................................... United Nations

UNCT ……………………………………….... United Nations Country Team

UNEP ................................................................ united nation environment programme

UNICEF ...........................................................Nation International Children’s Emergency Fund

UNWC……………………………………….United Nations Water Conference

WHO…………………………………… World Health Organization

WSH………………………………….......... Windows Security Health Agent

WSP……………………………………………Water and Sanitation Program

Table of content

Declaration............................................................................................................................................i
Approval..............................................................................................................................................ii

Abstract...............................................................................................................................................iii
Dedication...........................................................................................................................................iv

Acknowledgement...............................................................................................................................v
List of acronyms and abbreviations....................................................................................................xi

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION................................................................................................1

1.1 Background...................................................................................................................1

1.2 Statement of the Problem..................................................................................................3

1.3 Research objective............................................................................................................4

1.3.2 Specific Objectives....................................................................................................4

1.5 Justification of the study.....................................................................................................5

1.6 Scope of the study..............................................................................................................5

1.7 Definition of Key Terms....................................................................................................5

CHAPTER TWO: 1literature

Review .....................................................................................................................................9

2.1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................9

2.1.2 Theoretical Framework ...................................................................................................9

2.3 Empirical Review Of Literature .........................................................................……….11

2.4 The Zambian Context ......................................................................................................18

2.4.1 Conceptual Framework……………………………………………...……………………22

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................25

3.1Research setting .......................................................................................................................25
3.3Study Approach .......................................................................................................................27
3.1 Study Design .......................................................................................................................... 27
3.2 Sampling design and sample size .......................................................................................... 27
3.3 Characteristics of Participants ................................................................................................ 28
3.3.1Demographics Characteristics .............................................................................................28
3.4 Research Instruments ..............................................................................................................29
3.4.1Pilot study .............................................................................................................................29
3.5 Procedure and Data Collection ...............................................................................................29
3.6 Data Analysis ..........................................................................................................................29
3.7 Ethical Considerations ............................................................................................................30
4.1 General back ground of the respondents to water usage and access to portable water .. 32

4.2 Water sources for drinking and other purposes..................................................................32

4.3 Water quality....................................................................................................................... 34

4.4 Water treatment................................................................................................................... 36

4.5 Toilet use and accessibility in Garden house Compound................................................. 39

4.6 Impacts of poor access to portable water and basic sanitation.......................................... 40

4.7 Health impacts..................................................................................................................... 40

4.8 Economic impacts................................................................................................................40

4.9 Reduced productivity due to absenteeism....................................................................... 41

4.10 Increasing medical expense............................................................................................. 41

4.11 Expenses for alternative drinks.........................................................................................41

4.12 Impacts on the household income................................................................................... 42

4.13 Environmental impacts......................................................................................................42

4.14 Factors hindering access to portable water......................................................................... 43

4.15 Administration problem.................................................................................................... 43

4.16 Failure in community participation.................................................................................. 43

4.17 Factors hindering access to portable water and basic sanitation....................................44

4.18 Factors prohibiting building a toilet............................................................................ 45

5.1 Time and ability................................................................................................................. 45

5.2 Lack of facilities................................................................................................................ 46

5.3 Factors related to land.......................................................................................................... 46

5.4 Benefits of improving access to water and sanitation...................................................... 47

5.5 Water and sanitation versus development......................................................................... 47

5.6 Measures that can be taken............................................................................................... 48

CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSIONANDRECOMMENDATIONS.

6.1 Conclusion…...................................................................................................................... 55

6.2 Recommendations............................................................................................................... 56

6.3 Recommended improvement measures from the community.......................................... 58

References........................................................................................................ 59

Appendices....................................................................................................... 60
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Water supply in urban areas is intermittent and worsening to an average of 17 hours supply a day
in recent years due to electrical power cuts and dwindling water resources. Zambia is nonetheless
rich in rivers and lakes and only an estimated 1.5 percent of the annual renewable water
resources are being used at present. During the dry season water resources are scarce especially
in the south of the country (due to insufficient reservoirs and dams and competition between
agricultural and industrial users). Annual rainfall averages between 1,400 mm in the north and
declines to 700 mm in the south (including in Lusaka province). As a result, groundwater
resources are unevenly distributed (WHO, 2015).

However, the Zambian water sector is still set to address the problems of poor service delivery,
having reorganized the sector, putting in place a more effective and efficient institutional
framework in the spheres of water and sanitation. The government, since adopting the seven
sector principles in the National Water Policy, 1994, has steadily been implementing the reforms
without diverting from the guiding principles. The reform is still ongoing. Although the water
supply and sanitation situation in many peri- urban areas is far from ideal the bigger challenge to
improve living conditions through WSS is in the overcrowded fringe areas of towns.

According to Colin (2003) states that, the adverse impact of poor sanitation is most acute in
Lusaka, Zambia’s capital and largest city. The population of the city was estimated at 1.7 million
in 2008. With a population growth rate of 4.5 percent, one of the highest in Sub-Saharan Africa,
the city’s population was estimated at 2.3 million in 2015 and is estimated to grow to 5 million
by 2035. Lusaka is suffering from a sanitation crisis that claims lives through regular occurrence
of cholera, typhoid and dysentery, and causes severe environmental pollution. An estimated 70
percent of Lusaka’s urban residents live in 33 “urban areas”, where roughly 90 percent of the
population relies on pit latrines, most of which are unimproved. One percent defecate in the
open. 50 percent of Lusaka’s water supply is derived from fairly shallow groundwater abstracted
within the city, which is prone to contamination through fissures in the underlying rock.

Over recent years, there has been a significant growth of interest in research studies focusing on
water and sanitation. Academicians of different disciplines Development Studies, Sociology and
others have taken serious interest in the study of water challenges particularly in urban areas. The
aim of this study is to investigate challenges faced by urban dwellers in accessing safe water and
sanitation. Rapid urbanization in many parts of the developing world such as Zambia is putting
increasing strain on the ability of municipalities to deliver critical services, such as water and
sanitation. urban areas surrounding cities in the developing world are often at the fringes of
urban planning, both physically and politically, making service provision an even greater
challenge. In addition, these areas face a variety of challenges related to poverty, environmental
degradation, shifting cultures and unclear social boundaries (Evans, 2005).

Different authors such as (Evans, 2005; Fewtrell and Colfrod, 2004), agree that access to safe
water and sanitation is believed to be essential for health, security, livelihood, and quality of life,
and is especially critical for women and children. Improved water supply and sanitation
interventions could thus provide a wide range of benefits: longer lifespan, reduced morbidity and
mortality from various diseases, higher school attendance, lower health costs, and less time and
effort devoted to managing water and waste (Galiani et al, 2005; and Jalan and Ravallion, 2003).

The time saved could allow women to engage in other productive tasks such as marketing. In
1977, the international community declared the 1980s the “International Drinking Water Supply
and Sanitation Decade” in the context of the United Nations Water Conference. The goal was
that, by the end of the decade, all people worldwide would have access to clean water and
sanitation. More than 30 years later, almost 40 percent of the world’s population remains without
improved sanitation. Furthermore, even facilities characterized as “improved” are not always
safe: In urban areas, the waste of 2.1 billion people is captured and stored in latrines, with no
systematic way to ensure extraction, transport, treatment and disposal, or recycling (Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation, 2010). Although the world is on schedule to meet the drinking water
target of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (“Less than 12 percent of the world’s
population without improved drinking water by 2015”), the goal on sanitation (“Less than 23
percent of the world’s population without improved sanitation by 2015”) will likely be missed.

AWorld water resources face new challenges that suggest a renew role for the theory of change
in water management. Scarcity, growing populations, and massive development have led to
increased competition over water resources and subsequent elevated pollution levels. Climate
change is expected to unevenly affect the hydrological cycle, leading to increased variability in
water supplies across time and space and uncertainty in water allocation decisions. Future
investments in water resource projects will be astronomical, needing much more stable rules for
cost allocations among participating entities and over time. Levels of water disputes may vary
from local to regional, state, and international levels. All of these suggest that while Game
Theory (GT) models such as theory of change and applications to water resources have advanced
over the years, much more is expected (WHO, 2015).

The problem of inadequate access to water and sanitation exists both in rural and urban areas.
However, for several reasons, the problem is particularly pressing in cities: Increasingly in urban
areas which are characterized by slums and unplanned settlements, this is where a large
proportion of the poor live. Migration, both temporary and permanent, from impoverished rural
areas to larger urban centres has usually promised large improvements in welfare (Chowdhury et
al, 2009), but these increases may be mitigated by poor urban infrastructure. Furthermore, the
crowded conditions of urban settlements in theory heighten the health risks associated with poor
sanitation and its negative externalities.

According to (UN-Habitat, 2010) Scale of the Challenge aggravated by high-density living

inadequate stage solid waste management, and poor drainage. Although the number of urban
dwellers practicing open defecation has fallen overall from 145 million to 101 million, it has
risen from 14 million to 25 million in Sub-Saharan Africa, and has fallen only slightly in
Southeast Asia, from 19 million to 17 million people. Both access to and the quality of sanitation
will need to increase at a much faster pace and on a larger scale than in the past to meet this
continuously growing demand. It is against this backdrop that this research has been embarked
on which will focus on identifying water and sanitation innovative micro- and medium-scale
solutions to the problems of inadequate access to water and sanitation in Garden House
Compound, a peri-urban area of Zambia’s Lusaka province.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Rapid urbanization in Zambia and many parts of the developing world is putting increasing strain
on the ability of municipalities to deliver critical services, such as water and sanitation. Peri-
urban areas such as garden house compound, George compound, Misisi compound and other
surrounding cities in Zambia are often at the fringes of urban planning, both physically and
politically, making service provision an even greater challenge.
According to WHO report (2015) 70% of the population in the Garden house compound, people
are in need of access to safe and clean water supply, sanitation and solid waste management
services which are sufficient and affordable. They also need resources to improve water supply
and sanitation at the household level. These services are critical in order to reduce disease
burden, protect the environment, increase time serving and improve household income.

The poor, children, people living with disabilities and other vulnerable groups in particular suffer
when these services are inadequate. Further according to a joint monitoring by UNICEF and
WHO estimates of 2016, some 44% of Peri – urban population in Zambia lacks access to
improved sanitation and that at least 40% of these dwellers do not have access to clean water
supply. This disparity calls for a research to unearthealth the primary causes of these challenges
so that solutions can be gathered, hence this research (UNICEF/WHO, 2016).

1.3 Research objective

To investigate people’s accessibility to safe and readily available water for drinking and
domestic use: a case study of garden house compound Lusaka Zambia.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

1. To unearth the primary challenges in accessing clean water and availability for
domestic use among residents of garden house compound.
2. To explore major causes of sanitation challenges among garden house compound.
3. To suggest possible solutions to the water and sanitation challenges among the
victims.

1.4 Research Questions

1. What are the primary challenges in accessing clean water and availability for
domestic use among residents of garden house compound?
2. What are major causes of sanitation challenges among garden house compound?
3. What are possible solutions to the water and sanitation challenges among the
victims?
1.5 Justification of the study

This study is to come up with a program and policy relevance that contributes to improving
water sanitation in Zambian communities. The findings of the study will also contribute to the
knowledge base on factors related to good water supply in Lusaka compounds.

1.6 Scope of the study

The study will be conducted in Lusaka specifically garden house compound and at Lusaka water
Sewerage Company. Only residents from garden house compound will be sampled and only
works at Lusaka water Sewerage Company will be sampled.

However, not only this, most organizations and institutions such as UNICEF operate in the urban
areas thereby creating a very serious gap in giving access to safe water between poor urban and
rural dwellers. Therefore, findings of this study will help bridge the gap between the two in that
it will advocate for an equal focus to the provision clean and safe water and sanitation.

1.7 Definition of Key Terms

To define accessibility, water provision and hygiene for purposes of this study, Evans (2005)”s
and WHO, (2011) definitions were adopted:

Accessibility is any content or functionality that is fully available to and usable by people.

Domestic purposes mean provision of Water Services for day to day domestic requirements
including drinking, washing and sanitation.

Sanitation; Safe “on-site” collection, storage, treatment and disposal, re-use or recycling of
human excreta;

Connection to sewage systems; Management, re-use and recycling of solid waste; Collection and
management of industrial waste products; v) Management of hazardous wastes (hospital wastes,
chemical/radioactive and other dangerous substances).WHO (2011) defines a sanitation facility
as “improved” if the facility is one that is likely to hygienically separate human excreta from
human contact. Improved sanitation facilities include:
i) Flush or pour-flush to piped sewer system, septic tank or pit latrine, ventilated improved
pit latrine, and pit latrine with slab and composting toilet. However, sanitation facilities
are not considered improved when shared with other households, or open to public use.

Water Provision and Management:

i) Access to water network at household, neighborhood or local level;

ii) ii) Drainage and disposal and re-use or recycling of household waste water.
iii) Drainage of storm water;
iv) Treatment and disposal, re-use/recycling of sewage effluents.

Hygiene:

i) Safe storage of water;

ii) Safe treatment of foodstuffs;
iii) Safe hand washing practices.

Water plays a fundamental role in people’s lives. Access to safe water is a basic human need and
a key factor in the development and sustainability of human societies. Access to facilities and
services for safe disposal of human waste, i.e. basic sanitation, is considered to be equally
important, because a lack of sanitation results in contaminated water resources and exposure to
disease. At the societal level, sanitation is also required to ensure human dignity and personal
safety (WHO,2015).
LITERATURE REVIEW

The purpose of this chapter is to critically review the Game theory model particularly Theory of
Change in the need to bring people’s accessibility to safe and readily available water for drinking
and domestic use. Secondly, this chapter will explore various studies and publications related to
the research problem and what various scholars and authors had said about the aforementioned.
Also critical review of empirical studies was undertaken and an effort to evaluate contributions
will be made and pertinent knowledge gaps will be identified.

2.1. THEORETICAL LITERATURE REVIEW

Under this section, this study will review one theory; Theory of Change.

2.1.1 WHAT IS A THEORY OF CHANGE?

A theory of change is a method that explains how a given intervention, or set of interventions, is
expected to lead to specific development change, drawing on a causal analysis based on available
evidence. A theory of change for the for any needs-change must be driven by sound analyses,
consultation with key stakeholders and learning on what works and what does not in diverse
contexts drawn from the experiences of the UN and its partners.

A theory of change helps to identify solutions such as water and sanitation challenges, to
effectively address the causes of problems that hinder progress and guide decisions on which
approach should be taken, considering UN comparative advantages, effectiveness, feasibility and
uncertainties that are part of any change process. This theory also helps to identify the underlying
assumptions and risks that will be vital to understand and revisit throughout the process to ensure
the approach will contribute to the desired change.

2.1.2 PURPOSE: WHY USE A THEORY OF CHANGE?

First, development challenges are complex, and are typically caused by many factors and layers
that are embedded deeply in the way society functions. For example, opening a legal aid clinic
may not lead to more women accessing justice services unless issues of cultural sensitivities,
needed legal reforms and childcare constraints are addressed as well. A theory of change can
help a United Nations Country Team (UNCT) systematically think through the many underlying
and root causes of development challenges, and how they influence each other, when
determining contribution to achieving development change.

Second, a theory of change provides a framework for learning both within and between
programming cycles. By articulating the causes of a development challenge, making assumptions
explicit on how the proposed strategy is expected to yield results, and testing these assumptions
against evidence including what has worked well, or not, in the past the theory of change helps
ensure a sound logic for achieving change.

The theory of change also helps make course corrections if the selected approach is not working
or if anticipated risks materialize. New learning and lessons from monitoring and evaluation help
refine assumptions and inform decisions on how an approach should be adapted to deliver
planned results which is also applicable in the water works supply. Adjustments to the theory of
change should also be made in light of changing circumstances, especially in response to crisis
and shocks, as well as part of regular monitoring.

Third, the theory of change is increasingly being utilized as a means for developing and
managing partnerships and partnership strategies. The process of agreeing on a theory of change
establishes different views and assumptions among programme planners, beneficiaries, donors,
programme staff, and so on. It can foster consensus and motivate stakeholders by involving them
early in the planning process and by showing them how their work contributes to long-term
impact, thus the adoption of this theory.

2.3 EMPIRICAL LITERATURE REVIEW

Under this section, the author will review different publications and empirical studies related to
the current and past findings of water and sanitation problems in diverse localities and contexts.
The first barrier to improvement of peri-urban services is insufficient supply, especially of
networked services. As mentioned earlier, a high percentage of the urban poor particularly peri-
urban dwellers remain excluded from water and sanitation networks. Precisely, less than 15
percent of those living in Asia and Africa have access to sewer sanitation (Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, 2011). Less than 50 percent of the poorest urban residents in Africa, and less than 40
percent in Asia have access to piped water (WHO and UN-Habitat, 2010).
The cause of insufficient supply is migration from rural to urban areas which has increased in the
last few decades, especially in the developing world such as Zambia. The rural poor usually
come to large cities to take advantage of job opportunities and improved living standards not
available in their previous areas of residence (Glaeser, 2011). Moving to cities is also often the
primary method of income diversification for rural agricultural workers.

A 2008 World Bank analysis estimated that a third of people living on less than US$2 per day
reside in urban areas, and UN-Habitat estimates that just under 40 percent of urban dwellers live
in slums, a number that is growing by more than 20 million per year (Baker, 2008). Most of the
world’s population now lives in urban areas, and in developing regions the proportion living in
cities and towns has risen from 35 percent in 1990 to 45 percent in 2010 from 1.4 billion to 2.5
billion people (Jacobsen et al., 2012). By necessary implication, governments, NGOs and other
institutions are under pressure to sustainably and adequately supply clean water and safe
sanitation. A number of explanations have been proposed for the inadequate supply of safe
water, and especially, sanitation. Building water and sanitation infrastructure is costly and may
involve numerous technical, bureaucratic, and legal constraints (Water and Sanitation Program,
2007). Overcoming these constraints is further complicated by the complementarities in water
and sanitation provision: many of the safest sanitation improvements require adequate water
supply, and modern sanitation solutions without water may actually be counterproductive for
health.

Water infrastructure must, therefore, be provided either before sanitation infrastructure is built,
or ideally as a joint project, which in turn increases the costs of service provision. Improvements
in the planning and delivery of services are essential to promote more efficient use of water
resources. However, a report by UN holds that, overcoming technical supply problems must be
complemented by a resource management framework involving national, regional, and local
authorities (UN Millennium Project, 2005). How to mobilize public resources (through revenue
generation, taxation, innovations in pricing, cross subsidization, and so on) to overcome the
public finance challenges may be a fruitful area of inquiry for funded projects. Some cases, such
as Mexico City and Chennai, the physical in- accessibility of peri-urban localities significantly
limits the provision of water supply not only through extensions to the piped network but also
through alternative forms of supply. In other cases, such as Cairo, the formal system actively
obstructs informal supply efforts, with the government trying to eradicate informal water vendors
without realizing fully the consequences this might have on limiting access by the peri-urban
poor. In Dar es Salaam, informally supplied water fails to meet minimum standards of quality,
with negative impacts on users’ health.

However, what needs to be considered is the potential of the informal private system to provide a
reliable and fairly flexible source to the peri-urban poor when it comes to the frequency of
supply, pricing and modes of payment. The formal (private) system, on the other hand, is highly
regulated and thus less flexible in adapting to poor people’s needs and capacities (UN
Millennium Project, 2005) According to a report be UNEP (2011), climate change is altering the
availability and quantity of water throughout the world.

Furthermore, the "urbanization of poverty" and the massive internal migration of people from
rural areas to cities are placing growing pressure on increasingly scarce water resources. Both
these trends increase the threats to public health posed by poor WSH services in densely
populated areas such as slums. Thus, moving forward, it is critical that policymakers and
researchers search for ways to overcome not just current constraints to adequate water supply,
but develop possibly pre-emptive responses to evolving challenges. For example, if the
infrastructure is indeed stressed beyond carrying capacity, can public policies or other innovative
interventions affect the quantity or composition of the population that needs to be served?
Because of the links between water and sanitation, such research has the potential to impact
water supply, sanitation, and other urban services all at once.

In similar lines, the findings of a survey conducted by J-PAL researchers with over 5,000 slum
dwellers in Delhi (Banerjee et al., 2011) shed light. The respondents highlighted the following
deficiencies: 44 percent faced water scarcity, 90 percent reported that the drains were
overflowing, and 99 percent reported that the nearby dumpsters were emptied less than once a
month. A comprehensive toilet audit in these same communities found that 83 percent of toilets
had fecal or significant amounts of other waste matter lying around the facilities, and only 16
percent had soap or other sanitary fluid for washing. When asked about priorities regarding
urban facilities, slum dwellers identified water as the most problematic issue (50 percent of
respondents), followed by sewage and drainage (20 percent), and garbage (15 percent).

However, cities and peri-urban centres have often been unprepared to absorb expanding
populations and provide adequate urban services--housing, sanitation, health, and education,
among others to meet the needs of these rapidly growing new populations. Consequently,
migration has shifted the locus of global poverty to the cities, a process now recognized as the
“urbanization of poverty” (UN-Habitat, 2003a). In many cities, water, sanitation, and hygiene
infrastructure is stressed beyond current capacity, and infrastructure investment has not kept pace
with rapid and unplanned urbanization (Water Aid, 2007).

Temporary and seasonal migrants can exacerbate the service provision challenge, as these
migrants often live in temporary shelters without improved sanitation, waste disposal or water
facilities. They introduce volatility in the slum populations, and are not integrated into
preexisting social networks, making it more difficult to introduce community solutions to
institutional problems (UN-Habitat, 2003).

Furthermore, this problem of overcrowded cities with inadequate urban services is getting more
serious. For example, from 1975 to 2007, the growth rate of urban populations in the developing
world was 3.35 percent annually more than three times larger than the growth of the rural
population. In 2007, the world’s urban population surpassed the rural population. In Africa and
Asia, over 2 billion people live in cities, and this number is expected to increase by 150 percent
by 2025 (United Nations, 2008).

Peri-urban is characterized by poverty these people, face enormous challenges in their daily
lives. Almost a billion people (more than one-third of the urban population), primarily in the
developing world, live in slums. Living conditions in slums are characterized by overcrowding,
high levels of unemployment or underemployment, deficient urban services (water, sanitation,
education, and health), and widespread insecurity, including violence against women (UN
Habitat, 2003). The institutional context is relevant for understanding and addressing peri-urban
water management problems. Here, institutions are defined as formal and informal ‘rules’ that
structure interactions and behavior in society. Formal rules include laws, policies, and
regulations, while informal rules refer to customs, codes of conduct, and taboos. With regards to
water management, institutions exist to facilitate coordination over its use and allocation. For
example, service providers can use water tariffs, a type of rule intended to regulate water usage.

In this way, institutions serve a function in society by offering guidance during the problem
solving process. In peri-urban areas, however, these institutions are often ineffective. Typically,
institutions are arranged along rural and urban (administrative) boundaries, with peri-urban
governance defined by rural institutions. These traditional rural institutions are unable to support
the needs of communities in such a dynamic context. In some cases, peri-urban institutions are
fragmented or overlapping. As a result of this, identifying which rules apply, or who has what
roles and responsibilities in a given situation, is challenging. Moreover, peri-urban areas are
much more socially-heterogeneous than rural villages. Often, multiple actors with varying
interests are competing for the same resources. Balancing actor needs is an important part of
peri-urban governance, but requires supportive institutional arrangements. Without it, peri-urban
communities can become marginalized from essential public services (Water and Sanitation
Program, 2007).

Examples of ineffective institutional arrangements can be found in peri-urban Khulna

(Bangladesh). Here, urbanisation is rapid and largely unregulated. Despite being located in the
water-rich Ganges delta, peri-urban communities face drinking water insecurity. Access to safe
drinking water supply is limited in many communities. Conflicts have also emerged between
peri-urban and urban water users over access to groundwater, an important source of drinking
water. For example, in nearby Phultala (north of Khulna city), peri-urban residents organized
protests and filed a legal case against a large-scale groundwater abstraction project by Khulna
city.

Declining groundwater levels and contamination from iron, salinity, arsenic, industrial, and
wastewater contamination is also reported in this region. Together, this provides a clear signal
that existing institutions are unable to support sustainable or equitable water management
outcomes. Even though peri-urban communities are adversely affected by the outcomes of
institutional design, they have limited insight into their institutional context.

This is the result of isolation from formal decision-making arenas that limits access to
information about institutions and the actors operating within decision-making arenas who apply
these institutions. As a result, peri-urban communities have limited ability to formally intervene.
This has been observed in peri-urban Khulna, where residents have previously resorted to
informal strategies given their isolation from formal policy arenas. Research from other peri-
urban contexts also signals a lack of participatory interventions. Thus, there is a need to support
the problem solving efforts of peri-urban communities by closing this knowledge gap and
building capacity to navigate policy arenas. While improved water sources are fairly common, as
mentioned, access to piped water is quite limited in sub-Saharan Africa (35 percent), Southern
Asia (51 percent) and South eastern Asia (52 percent) (WHO and UNICEF, 2011). The
availability and quality of water at improved access points varies greatly. Water from standpipes
and kiosks, key sources of access for the poor, is not always available 24 hours a day. As a
result, people (often women) spend hours fetching water, and must frequently adjust their work
and rest schedules to get water. Intermittent service, which results in unreliable availability and
inadequate volumes of often contaminated water, causes a large number of households to store
water in household reservoirs, and supplement piped water with water from tanker operators and
water vendors (Water and Sanitation Program, 2007).

Despite the centrality of these issues to human welfare, the provision of water and sanitation
services has not been a priority in the allocation of funds by governments and other stakeholders
(UN Millennium Project, 2005). Activities with a more visible and transparent link to economic
productivity have been prioritized over sanitation, as has the provision of other types of
infrastructure. There are several reasons for this. First, large-scale public works to improve
sanitation are more time-consuming and expensive than other types of urban services, including
extensions to the water network (UN Millennium Project, 2005).

The WHO-UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program assesses access to clean and safe water in terms
of service levels broken down into infrastructure, availability and water quality. The highest
service level, “Safely managed water” is defined as “drinking water from an improved water
source piped water, boreholes or tube wells, protected dug wells, protected springs, and
packaged or delivered water that is located on premises, available when needed and free from
faecal and priority chemical contamination” (WHO and UNICEF, 2017: 8). This is followed by
Basic, Limited, Unimproved and Surface Water respectively. “Surface water” and
“Unimproved” both involve the use of natural to simple water sources such as open bodies of
water and unprotected dug wells respectively. Basic and Limited service levels are primarily
determined by access/availability of water: collecting drinking water from an improved source
not exceeding 30 minutes (round trip to water source including queuing) for Basic level, and
exceeding 30 minutes for Limited level.

In a study done in Malawi, findings show that Eco-sanitation has had an interesting effect on the
gender roles associated with latrine construction. During the baseline survey the men and women
were asked separately why they did not have a latrine? The men tended to give technical reasons
such as lack of wood or tools or the tendency of the sandy soil to cause pit collapse. The women
were more direct and thought it was more to do with the laziness and drunkenness of their
husbands. The project has now found out that it has always been the men’s role to dig the 3metre
deep latrine pit and with the husbands refusing to do this, the women and the family have - in
effect, been denied access to any form of sanitation.

With eco-sanitation latrines, it is only necessary to dig a 1. 2meter latrine pit and the women in
Embangweni have recognized that this is not a difficult task. Many of them have now dug their
own pits, built their own latrines and provided safe sanitation for their family for the first time. In
some cases, there has also been an interesting knock on effect in that when the men have seen the
‘power’ of the faeces as a fertilizer they have been convinced of the need for a latrine and have
‘reclaimed’ their role as latrine builder.

One of the biggest factors as to why eco-sanitation is proving to be so popular is without a doubt,
the ever decreasing fertility of the soil in Malawi. Soil fertility in Malawi is 60% of what it was
ten years ago. People in rural communities are expert farmers and are well aware of this problem.
They complain that all their crops now need fertilizer if they are to produce a worthwhile yield.
When walking through fields in the maize growing season, it does not take long for even an
untrained eye to tell the difference between the pale, thin, yellow leaves of an unfertilized maize
crop and the tall, green heavy plants produced when fertilizer is added.

According Colin (2003) “The cost of fertilizer has rocketed and last season was around $14 for a
50 kg bag. This may not seem too high, but in a country where 60% of the population live on less
than a dollar a day, it is a huge proportion of the household budget.” Any system which reduces
this burden, and is free and within their control has got to be regarded as valuable. 80% of
Malawians are subsistence farmers and if this project continues to show the promise of these
early stages, the impact of ecological sanitation on rural livelihoods will be considerable.

In the 1970s, the Tanzanian Ministry of Health (MoH) put a major effort into improving
sanitation through a campaign in which each household was required to have a latrine. The
campaign did not achieve much. Most people constructed latrines so that they could show them
to health officers/sanitary inspectors. However, using them was another matter. The latrines were
not designed or constructed to hygienic standards and created hygiene problems rather than
sanitary solutions. Part of the blame was given to the authorities for inadequate technical
assistance to communities.

There is no “best” technical solution for all situations and hence, technical solutions must be
adapted to the local environment, financial resources, skills and the traditional “latrine behavior”
of the user (Winblad and Kilama, 1985). Private sector participation (PSP) can play a very
important role in closing the ever- increasing sanitation gap. PSP will assist in drawing in
financial and human resources to reach people in need. Decentralised sanitation options are
cheaper than highly technical sewerage treatments.

High density living in urban areas necessitates timely and adequate planning for sanitation to
minimise the risk of epidemics (Kironde, 2000). Tanzania has no adequate sanitation policy to
guide activities in this sector, although a policy is under development. Sanitation is also
fragmented between different sectors of different ministries. This causes conflicting
accountability areas and ideas when implementing sanitation concepts and options through PSP.
Therefore, lack of sanitation policy is one of the major causes of the challenge.

2.4 CASE OF ZAMBIA; LUSAKA

The U.N. Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for water and sanitation are to halve the
proportion of people without access to improved drinking water and sanitation facilities between
1990 and 2015 (WHO and UNICEF, 2013). Despite meeting the water goal and progressing
towards the sanitation goal, at the end of 2011 there remained 768 million people without access
to an improved water source and another 2.5 billion without access to improved sanitation
facilities (WHO and UNICEF, 2013). Lack of access to improved water and sanitation facilities
can result in diarrheal illness, which causes 760,000 deaths among children under 5 each year
(WHO, 2013). This lack of access can also lead to respiratory illness (Dinh et al., 2006;
Hennessy et al., 2008; Luby and Hadler, 2008). Worldwide, acute lower respiratory infections
caused over 900,000 deaths among children under 5 in 2013 (WHO, 2014). By 2030 the water
and sanitation SDGs aim to achieve universal, equitable access to drinking water and sanitation
(United Nations, 2014). In order to achieve this ambitious goal, significant expansion of water
and sanitation infrastructure will be required. Common strategies to provide better access to
water and sanitation facilities have included introducing community wells, point of use water
disinfection, and latrines to rural communities (Fewtrell et al., 2005; Waddington et al., 2009)
More than 50% of the world’s population lived in cities in 2011 and additional urbanization is
expected; in Africa, the urban population is projected to triple by 2050 (United Nations, 2012).
Many cities are not equipped with the necessary water and sanitation infrastructure to support
such substantial urban population growth. In 2011, an estimated 132 million and 728 million
urban dwellers did not have access to improved water and sanitation, respectively (WHO and
UNICEF, 2013). Zambia, where approximately 40% of the population lives in urban areas, is not
on track to reach the MDGs (WHO and UNICEF, 2013). From 1990 – 2011 the proportion of the
urban population with access to improved water sources decreased from 89% to 86%, and the
proportion with access to improved sanitation also decreased, from 61% to 56% (WHO and
UNICEF, 2013).

Limited access to adequate water and sanitation is one of the key developmental challenges faced
by Zambia. Zambia has a high poverty rate, at 74% in 2010 (using a Purchasing Power Parity at
US$1.25 per day), compared to 49% in the World Bank’s low income countries aggregate
grouping (World Bank, 2015). In addition, Zambia has high income inequality, with a GINI
Index of 58 in 2010 (World Bank, 2015). Key indicators of health are similarly low. Life
expectancy at birth in 2013 was 58 in Zambia, compared to 62 in the World Bank’s low income
countries aggregate grouping (World Bank, 2015). The mortality rate for children under 5 (per
1,000 live births) was 87 in 2013; in the World Banks’s low income countries aggregate
grouping the mortality rate was 76 (World Bank, 2015). Malnutrition (stunting) is also prevalent
in Zambia, at 46% in 2007 (World Bank, 2015). These indicators are directly or indirectly related
to the status of water supply and sanitation infrastructure, and underscore the universal necessity
of equitable access to WASH facilities.

The lack of adequate water and sanitation infrastructure is apparent in Lusaka, where the current
infrastructure - built in the 1960s and 1970s for a population of 300,000 - is not sufficient to
meet the needs of the current population of 1.8 million (Central Statistics Office, 2011). The
situation is especially acute in low-income, peri-urban areas (PUA) in Lusaka, which constitute
approximately 70% of the Lusaka population (Central Statistics Office, 2010). In 2010, only
24% of peri-urban households had piped water to the home or plot, and nearly 60% collected
their water from community sources such as kiosks (Central Statistics Office, 2010). Lusaka
Water and Sewerage Company (LWSC) estimates that water is available an average of 17 hours
per day in the network, however, some peri-urban areas have access to water for an average of
only 4 hours per day (CDC, 2016,).

Access to sanitation infrastructure in PUAs is similarly low, where nearly 88% of households use
pit latrines (Central Statistics Office, 2010). However, a majority of these pit latrines do not meet
the definition of “improved” (e.g., pit latrines without a slab or shared pit latrines) (Central
Statistics Office, 2012) and many are not properly constructed (Millennium Challenge
Corporation, 2012). Coupled with the karst geology in much of Lusaka (GauffIngenieure, 2013b)
- which is highly permeable and characterized by caves and cracks - these latrines can
contaminate the shallow wells that some peri-urban residents use as a water source (Millennium
Challenge Corporation, 2012), and can lead to diarrheal illness and outbreaks. The drainage
infrastructure in Lusaka is also challenged and has degraded from a lack of maintenance
(Millennium Challenge Corporation, 2012).

In addition, informal residential areas have been built in areas that are close to drains, and these
areas are particularly prone to flooding (GauffIngenieure, 2013b). Topographically, Lusaka is
fairly flat, and consequently, parts of the city are inundated each rainy season (November to
April), leading to additional risk of waterborne illness (GauffIngenieure, 2013b). Furthermore,
because Lusaka has a high water table (GauffIngenieure, 2013c), flooding can be severe and
longer in duration in areas with karst geology when the water table reaches the ground surface
(GauffIngenieure, 2013b).

Given the current state of WASH infrastructure in Lusaka, its expansion and revitalization will
become increasingly more important to health and well-being as urbanization trends continue.
The infrastructure interventions planned as part of the Compact aim to, among other things,
decrease waterborne disease and promote economic growth by building new and rehabilitating
existing community kiosk connections, expanding residential water supply and sanitation
networks to underserved areas, and rehabilitating the drainage system. A review of the literature
offers strong evidence for the benefits of better WASH infrastructure.

The importance of water supply has been shown in meta-analyses that found water supply
interventions - such as installing standpipes or household connections - reduce diarrheal illness
by 25-37% (Fewtrell et al., 2005; Wolf et al., 2014). A meta-regression conducted by Wolf et al.
to identify the health effects of different types of water supply interventions found a relative risk
for diarrheal disease of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.72, 1.03) from interventions that provided piped water
connections (with non-continuous flow) to households that previously relied on improved
community sources (e.g., stand pipes), and a relative risk of 0.21 (95% CI: 0.08, 0.56) in
interventions that provided continuous, high quality piped water connections to households that
previously relied on improved community sources (Wolf et al., 2014). While the illness
reduction from a continuous connection is based on limited evidence from a single study, the
meta-regression identifies the health benefits that can be achieved from household connections
that provide continuous water supply, which are envisioned in the intervention in Lusaka.

The health benefits of closer and more reliable access to water sources has been shown in several
other studies. For example, one multi-country study in sub-Saharan Africa found that even a 5-
minute decrease in one-way travel time was associated with decreased diarrheal disease
incidence and improved weight-for-age measures (Pickering & Davis, 2012). Closer access to
piped water has also been found to be protective against diarrheal morbidity (Thompson, 2001),
and to reduce diarrheal illness duration (Jalan &Ravallion, 2003).

Further, close access to piped water, either in the home or compound, has been linked to an
increase in the quantity of water consumed (Devoto et al., 2011; Thompson, 2001), and increased
water consumption has been shown to be protective against diarrheal disease (Shrestha et al.,
2013). Lacking water access and infrastructure has also been linked to respiratory diseases. A
2004 study in Vietnam found the lack of an indoor water source to be associated with the
development of influenza A H5N1 infection (Dinh et al., 2006). Another study in rural Alaska
found higher hospitalization rates for pneumonia, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus (for
children under 5) in regions with lower proportions of in-home water service (Hennessy et al.,
2008). And a study in Bangladesh found having a place inside the house with water to wash
hands to be protective against children under 5 reporting a cough or difficulty breathing in the
last 7 days (Luby and Hadler, 2008).

There is also significant evidence to support the importance of improved sanitation on health
(Fewtrell et al., 2005; Waddington et al., 2009; Wolf et al., 2014). However, as nearly 88% of
peri-urban households in Lusaka already have access to a pit latrine (CSO 2010), and the
LWSSD Compact aims to facilitate household connection to the sewer system via a flush toilet,
this review of the literature will be limited in scope to the health benefits associated with sewer
connected toilets. Sewer connections have been widely shown to decrease diarrhea; one meta-
analysis found a 31% reduction in diarrheal morbidity among households with access to a toilet
(Waddington et al., 2009).

In addition, a meta-regression, though based on findings from only two studies, found a relative
risk for diarrheal disease of 0.37 (95% CI: 0.31, 0.44) for sanitation interventions that provided a
sewer-connected toilet where before there was an improved sanitation facility (e.g., a latrine)
(Wolf et al., 2014). Installations of sewer connections in large urban cities in Brazil and Iran also
demonstrated a decrease in diarrheal prevalence; Barreto and colleagues found a decrease of
22% in Salvador, Brazil, while Kolahi et al. found diarrheal incidence to decrease by 9% in
Tehran, Iran (Barreto et al., 2007; Kolahi et al., 2009).

Furthermore, a study in peri-urban Lima, Peru, found the lack of a sewer connection to be
associated with decreased child growth (Checkley et al., 2004). While considering these findings,
it is important to note the studies are non-experimental in design (i.e., the site of interventions
was not determined by the authors), and therefore there is a risk for confounding. Randomized,
experimental interventions that provide sewer connections are few given the inherent cost of
sanitation infrastructure and equity considerations.

However, the studies presented, though limited in their study design, demonstrate the substantial
health gains that can result from sewerage connections in urban areas. The benefits of adequate
drainage infrastructure can also be found in the literature. In another observational study in
Brazil, the combined benefits of drainage and sewerage were demonstrated by Moraes et al., who
found a 40% and nearly 70% lower incidence of diarrhea in neighborhoods that had drainage
systems or both drainage and sewerage systems, respectively, compared to neighborhoods that
had neither (Moraes et al., 2003). In Lusaka, higher incidence of cholera has been linked to areas
that have smaller, insufficient drainage networks, and thus less flood control (Sasaki et al.,
2009).

Diarrheal illness can also create a financial burden for households as a result of medical and
transportation costs. Furthermore, illness can prevent a person from working or require that they
stay home to care for ill family members, resulting in potential income lost. This financial
burden is measured in a study in three African countries that found the total average cost per
episode of diarrheal illness to range from $2.63 to $6.24 (Rheingans et al., 2012). The potential
gain in productive days due to averted diarrheal illness is also substantial. One cost-benefit
analysis reported a worldwide gain of 310 and 550 million working days for adults 15 to 59
years old by meeting the Millennium Development Goals for water and sanitation and achieving
universal access to improved water supply and sanitation facilities, respectively (Hutton et al.,
2007).

In sub-Saharan African countries, the economic loss associated with inadequate access to water
supply and sanitation is estimated to be 4.3% of annual GDP (Hutton, 2013). In Zambia, the
economic loss associated with inadequate sanitation alone is estimated to be 1.3% of the national
GDP, an equivalent of approximately $194 million dollars. Nearly $180 million of that loss is
attributed to premature death from WASH-related diarrhea, diarrheal disease-related healthcare
costs, and productivity loss while sick with or accessing healthcare for diarrheal illness (Water
and Sanitation Program, 2012).

The visited residents clearly had challenges with waste disposal, with waste being visible in
drainages and open spaces. When interviewed on waste disposal, most residents stated using
formal waste collectors, usually via Lusaka City Council. However, spotted disposal sites were
usually full of waste, which residents explained, was collected inconsistently by the
municipality. Our findings cited the second most common form of waste disposal (25% in Site I,
20% in Site II) as being via informal collectors. Despite being unregulated, informal collectors
were stated to be a cheaper, more accessible waste disposal solution for community residents.
Still, several aspects such as the mode of collection of waste, treatment of waste and movement
of waste were often overlooked. In Site III, many residents attested to the use of ditches for
throwing waste. This is a banned practice however, due to the impact of burying non-degradable
waste on the environment. There have also been several accidents of pit latrines caving in due to
their being set up on and/or near former and/or existing ditches. Even so, the ban is not regulated.
Several residents living near dams also use these water locations to dispose of waste.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the methodology which was used in the study. It explains the research
setting, approach, design, sample, procedure, instruments for data collection and data analysis.
Ethical guidelines were also included under this section.

3.1. Research Setting

What is peri-urban? It is a challenge to define the term peri-urban because of the shifting nature
of such areas. There is no standard classification of peri-urban, and the term is applied to a
diverse mix of informal and formal settlements, which can contain a wide variety of housing
types and range from densely built slums to spacious suburban estates. In general, however, the
term refers to the geographical edge of the city, more specifically the urban fringe outside the
formal city-limits (Dupont, 2005).

In addition to this geographical definition peri-urban also describes the interface between rural
and urban activities, and embodies a transition from rural to urban norms, legislation and
institutional settings, in which social structures, commercial activities and even the built
environment are in flux. However, there are also examples of shrinking cities, where the peri-
urban contains a transition in the opposite direction, from urban to rural.

Spatially, PUAs are growing more rapidly than formal urban districts. In many cities peri-urban
sections such as Garden House Compound, Misisi, Kanyama, Makululu, Matero and many
others in Zambia, are already bigger than the formal areas (water and sanitation program, 2007),
and in most developing countries are characterized by rapid population growth, a mixture of
planned and un-planned settlements, inadequate service infrastructures, insecure land tenure,
social tension, and environmental and health problems.

The location of the Garden House Compound is indicated on the map below as depicted by
corresponding colours. According to Burr (2003), when societies are more or less isolated from
one another and there are few outside influences, what one generation passes on is slightly
different because of the variations in the delivery of services by relevant authorities. While the
problem of inadequate access to water and sanitation exists in both rural and urban areas, the
problem is particularly pressing in cities.

With internal migration and the “urbanization of poverty,” cities are where an increasing
proportion of the poor live. In the last three decades, growth in urban populations in developing
countries exceeded that of rural areas three-fold. In 2007 for example, there were already more
people living in cities than in rural areas in Zambia. `The water, sanitation, and hygiene
infrastructure of many cities especially peri-urban areas such as garden house compound is
therefore stressed beyond current capacity, and infrastructure investments have not kept pace
with rapid and unplanned urbanization.

Therefore, premised on the fact that this area is characterized by slums and high population
justifies the need for this research because it provided facture information pertaining water and
the challenges.

3.2 Study Design

This study employed qualitative approach. According to Merriam (2009: 13), “qualitative
researchers are interested in understanding the meanings people have constructed, that is, how
people make sense of their world and the experiences they have in the world”. This means that
qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or to
interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them. In this study the interest
was to investigate people’s accessibility to safe drinking water and challenges among residents
of garden house compound in a bid to come up with proposed solutions those policy makers can
utilize. Additionally, this approach was used because it is valuable in providing rich descriptions
of complex phenomena such as; exploring people’s opinions, perceptions, attitudes, views about
a phenomenon and so on. (Cole, 1988) describes it as a method of analyzing written, verbal or
visual communication messages and will be used with either qualitative or quantitative data. It is
also known as a method of analyzing documents.

Study Population

Sampling

Using purposive sampling, a total of 25 respondents were picked.

Sample Size

The population of interest garden house compound is one of the compounds of Lusaka Zambia
with lot residents. The criteria for who to pick for the study is how long a potential participant
has stayed in garden house compound. This sampling design was used in that it helped the
researcher choose participants who provided relevant data on the major water and sanitation
challenges in the area.

Characteristics of Participants

Demographic characteristics of the participants are shown on table below.

3.3.1 Demographics Characteristics

Variables Group Frequency Percentage

Gender Male 15 50%
Female 15 50%
Age Mean 49
Mode 38
Minimum 25
Maximum 67
Marital status Single 17 56
Married 3 20
 Widowed 1 24
Divorced 1 6
Separated 8 10
Level of education Primary 33 66%
Secondary 12 24%
Tertiary 5 24%

3.4. RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS

A semi-structured interview guide was used to collect data with the help of a recorder. Five pilot
interviews were conducted to test if people in the actual sample would understand the questions
in the interview. Semi structured interviews were used because they allowed a one to one
interaction between the two parties and also would give the interviewer and the participants an
opportunity to probe further for clarity, thus enhancing the richness of the information which was
gathered.

Pilot Study

A pilot study was conducted in Garden house compound to review interview questions and
prompts and evaluate their effectiveness in answering questions in line with research objectives.
A few adjustments were done to the interview questions so as to enhance understanding in the
actual sample.

3.5. PROCEDURE AND DATA COLLECTION

This research was done in Lusaka province specifically garden house compound, a peri-urban
setting. An informant was approached and consulted for the specific sample. With his direction,
individual participants were selected for their specific characteristics such as age and how long
they have stayed in the area. Participants were considered they need to have been in the area for
at least 3 years and not less than 25 years of age. Upon access to potential participants, the
researcher introduced himself and purpose of the whole research. Upon acceptance to participate,
interviews were conducted. Open-ended or ‘non-directive questioning were used to elicit
responses from the participants about on the Topic.

3.6. DATA ANALYSIS

Qualitative data was subjected to thematic content analysis. The aim is to attain a condensed and
broad description of attitudes, opinions and suggestion from the perspective of participants on
access to safe drinking water. Responses were transcribed and analysis was conducted using a
method called content analysis, a method of analyzing verbal or written documents in a bid to
identify recurring themes for purposes of analysis which is done in line with research objectives
and questions. The researcher therefore repeatedly read the transcript in order to extract repeated
themes in line with objectives of the study. Content analysis helped in the detailed examination
of each theme and category of the information under enquiry.

3.7. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Research is a scientific human endeavor that is organized according to a range of protocols,

methods, guidelines and legislation. As such, informed consent was the cornerstone of this
research. Participants were informed of the whole study goals including expected results. There
were informed of their right to participate voluntarily and to withdraw at any point if they so
wished. They were also informed that the study is entirely for academic purposes and as such
their identity would be kept anonymous and their individual responses confidential from the
public domain. The principle of veracity or truth telling is inherently important and the
researcher showed this by telling the participants the aim of the research, permission to record
the interview and why and the proposed outcomes in order to allow the participants to participate
willingly.
PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSION

The results and discussion are based on the information that was collected from various
sample respondents. The topics are discussed under broad headings below.

4.1 General backgrounds of the respondents to water usage and access to portable
water in Garden House Compound, Lusaka, Zambia.
In the data collection process, the data was collected on a house-to-house basis, only 40
percent male respondents were included because of the availability as most of them had to
go work or look for piece work. Most of the women had to stay home and look after the
children and do house chores.

Among the backgrounds in Table 3, household size and household income per month are
believed to determine the water use and demand in the households. The increase in
household size will increase the demand for water. The collected data also show that as
the household size increases the demand for more water increases. This can be seen from
the research results where a household with 2-5 members uses approximately 120 liters of
water per day. On the other hand, households with about 6-10 members use
approximately 200 liters of water per day
The variation in the liters of water needed per day shows that the household size
determines the liters of water need per day. This means that as the size of households
increase, the amount of water needed per day also increases.

Table 3 General background of respondents to water usage and access to portable water in
Garden House Compounds, Lusaka, Zambia.

Respondent background frequency perc

 enta
ge
Gender Male 12 40
Female 18 60
Age 16-25 9 30
26-35 12 40
36-45 7 23.3
46and above 2 6.7
Household size 2-5 13 43.3

6-10 17 56.7

Above10
Income per month Lessthank500 10 33.3
K500-1000 5 16.7
K1500-2500 15 50
K2500-5000
K5000andabove

For most of the people of Garden House Compound, their source of water for
washing, drinking, cooking and other household activities are public taps. Very
few individuals have piped water into their dwelling or piped water into the yard,
as can be seen in Figures 3 and 4 respectively. During the research, the researcher
came across only one household that has a borehole.

In order to have access to water from the public taps, a certain amount is paid,
depending on how many liters an individual wishes to purchase. According to the
local people of Garden House Compound, in the period 2004-2014 water was
supplied by Lusaka Water and Sewerage Company and World Vision, but due to
inadequate resources, the World Vision ended the programme of supplying water
to Garden House Compound. Some locals say the World Vision is carrying out
supportive programmes in other areas, hence, the need to withdraw from Garden
House Compound. This resulted in water supply in Garden House Compound
being even more erratic. When conditions are extremely bad, the local people fetch
their water from nearby places.
 Figure 3: Public tap in Garden House Figure 4: Piped water into yard in
Compound, Lusaka, Zambia. Garden House Compound, Lusaka,
Zambia.

The rain water is another source of water for drinking and other household activities. Rainwater
runoff from roofs can be collected and stored for drinking and other household activities. Unless
the rain water is affected during collection, it is believed to be of good quality. Unfortunately, the
availability of rain water is limited to only the rainy season and they should have corrugated-iron
sheet roofs to collect it. This being the case, availability of rain water is dependent on two
conditions, it is only available during the rainy season when the community members would
have access to it for a limited period in a year and the second condition is that households should
have iron roofs in order to collect the rain water. Figure 5 shows description of water sources for
drinking and other purposes.
 public taps 53.3% pipedintoyard33.3%
pipedintodwelling10% borehole3.3%

Figure 5: description of water sources for drinking and other purposes in Garden House
Compound, Lusaka, Zambia.

Water quality

Water quality is a term used to describe the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of
water, usually in regard to its suitability for a particular purpose. Although scientific
measurements are used to define water quality, but in this study it is difficult to inspect the
chemical and biological purity of the water used by the local people of Garden House
Compound.

As can be seen from figure3, the quality of the water is questionable, as the tap is surrounded by
a lot of dirt and garbage and in the rainy harbors a lot of flies which contribute towards
contaminating the water.

The community’s perception towards the water quality determines the way they treat the water
they get from the various sources. In Figure 6, among the respondents that were interviewed,
26.7 percent thought that the quality of the water is good, simply because it is piped. They do not
take into account the linking pipes which may be the points of contamination of the water. 30
percent of the respondents said the quality of the water is bad, as most of them usually get
diarrhea when they do not treat their water to drink, but when treated, they do not get the
diarrhea. 20 percent of the local people of Garden House Compound said they had no idea as to
whether the quality of water they drunk were good or bad. When asked whether at any point in
time they suffered from diarrhea, they said they had but that could have been as a result of food
poisoning or contaminated food, not necessarily bad quality water. 23.3 percent of the
respondents were not sure about the quality of the water.

Bad 30%
Good 26.3% not sure 23.3%
don'tknow20%

Figure 6: respondents’ perception towards water quality in Garden House Compound, Lusaka,
Zambia.

The respondents’ response is not based on scientific knowledge rather on the basis of their
perception which may include observing the clarity, sediments availability, taste or smell.

Water treatment

The water quality isperceivedasbadby30percentofthepeopleinthecommunityandgoodby

26.7 percent of the people. 23.3 percent of the respondents were not sure about the quality of the
water and 20 percent did not know. Of these, the 30 percent that said the quality was bad treated
their water to make it safer to drink. Those that were not sure about the quality of the water said
sometimes they treat the water and at other times they do not treat it.

The methods of water treatment includes, boiling the water, adding chlorine and letting it stand
and settle. Boiling the water takes the highest percentage and the easiest to apply.

It is well understood that the treatment of drinking water at home minimizes the exposure to
water born diseases; but it is neither a guarantee for great health benefits nor are placement for a
sustainable potable water infrastructure.

Toilet availability in Garden House Compound, Lusaka, Zambia

Sanitation is the hygienic means of promoting health through the prevention of human contact
with hazards of waste, as well as the treatment and proper disposal of sewage or wastewater.
Sanitation is also one of the basic human needs. Just as people have the right to water, they
should also have access to basic sanitation.

yes 76.7%
sharetoilet23.3%

Figure7: Toilet availability in Garden House Compound in Lusaka, Zambia.

The data collected from the sample respondents in Figure 7, shows that 76.7 percent of the community
has a toilet, even those who have a toilet; the toilets do not have any facilities. They are just simply
made of digging a hole in the ground down and building a wall around it and a roof. Some of the toilets
are so simple that they are built with wood and plastics. The maximum numbers of households who
share a single toilet are two.

As earlier stated, Sanitation is the hygienic means of promoting health through the prevention of human
contact with hazards of waste, as well as the treatment and proper disposal of sewage or wastewater.
The people of Garden House Compound lack basic sanitation. According to the respondents, there is
nothing that the council has done about sanitation in Garden House. There have not even been efforts of
awareness made to this effect. Some sections of Garden House Compound are clean those that have
taken it upon themselves to do something about sanitation. On the other hand, other sections are very
dirty and practicing very poor disposal methods of compiling garbage along the roads very close to the
houses. Other local members have resorted to digging pits in which to dispose off their wastes, as
shown in Figures 8 and 9.

Figure 8: dug pit for waste disposal in Figure 9: waste compiled along the road in
Garden House Shanty Compound, Lusaka, Zambia. Garden House Compound, Lusaka
Zambia.
Impacts of poor access to potable water and basic sanitation

There are many negative impacts associated with the poor accessibility to potable water and
basic sanitation on the community daily activities. The negative impacts are not debatable, and
the degree of understanding the negative consequences attached to it may vary from person to
person. In this study, many agreed with the negative consequences of the poor accessibility to
potable water and basic sanitation.

Health impacts
As the World Health Organization has stated, the poor access to potable water and basic
sanitation greatly affects the well-being of the community. The health effects of unsafe drinking
water and poor sanitation are not limited to illness alone. In some cases some people have died
because of diseases related to water and poor sanitation. The community members are greatly
exposed to diseases and those related to unsafe water and poor sanitation are common in the
community. Some diseases are also life threatening because of water and sanitation problems. It
can be said that the combination of unsafe drinking water and inadequate sanitation leads to a
deterioration in the human resources of the country at large.
Economic impacts
There are some economic impacts which were stated by the community. Some of them are
directly related to their health and some others are related to the time spent in collecting water.
Reduced productivity due to absenteeism
When people get sick, they are forced to stay away from work, as they are not strong enough for
any activity. This reduces the household income. If the patient is the household head, the income
of that particular household is highly negatively affected. Children are greatly exposed to unsafe
water and poor sanitation related disease since they spend their time playing in a dirty
environment. Thus, parents have to take their children to a health station if they get sick. This
means that parents have to be absent from their jobs, which lessens productivity.
Increasing medical expense
Most of the members of the community have very low salaries. With this low income, they are
expected to pay for their own treatment and that of their children when they get sick. Thus, high
medication costs are one of the economic costs which the community regards as a great burden.
Expenses for alternative drinks
Some members of the community believe that rather than drinking the water that is not safe, they
prefer to drink alcohol. As a result, they use their money on other alternative drinks. As they use
the limited amount of the household income, the other members of the household suffer from a
lack of food, in most of the cases household heads or males are the ones who control the
household income. And it is the household heads that often go to alcohol shops and spend their
limited amounts of money.
Impact on the house hold income
It is well understood that the economy of a country is negatively affected by the poor
accessibility to potable water and basic sanitation. The community members have also realized
that unsafe drinking water and unimproved sanitation has a negative impact on their household
incomes.
As shown in Figure 10, there are people who believe that the poor accessibility of potable water
and basic sanitation has an impact on their household income. This group accounts for 83.3
percent of the respondents, while the rest believe poor accessibility to potable water and basic
sanitation does not have any impact on their household income. Those who believe it does have
an impact identify how the poor accessibility of potable water and lack of basic sanitation affects
their livelihood. If they do not get potable water, then they get sick, thus they are not productive
at work which will decrease their income. One of the respondents explains the consequences of
unsafe drinking water and unimproved sanitation
“If I get sick as a result of drinking unclean water, my family does not get food to eat, let alone
to have all basic necessities because I am the bread winner of my family. Lack of access to
potable water and basic sanitation has a huge negative impact on my household income”.
 Yes83.3%
No16.7%

Figure10: impacts on house hold income in Garden House Compound, Lusaka, Zambia.

Environmental impacts

Most of the respondents agreed that the poor accessibility to potable water and basic sanitation
have some negative impacts, however, there were very few respondents who argued that poor
accessibility of water and sanitation does not have a negative impact on their daily lives. This
attitude towards the current water and sanitation status helps them to easily adapt and accept the
situation by drinking water from unprotected sources. Others think that though they are facing
the problem of water and sanitation, they have already adapted to it and learnt how to live with it.
They believe that the poor access to water and sanitation is not considered as a big challenge
which the community currently faces. From the findings, there are three groups of people based
on their perception towards the impact of poor water accessibility and sanitation, people who
know and understand the negative consequence of the poor quality of water, people who know
the negative consequences of the poor quality water but adapt themselves to it and are fine with
it, and the third group is people who do not understand the negative consequences of the poor
quality of water and believe it does not have any negative impacts on their livelihoods
 Factors hindering access to potable water

The members of Garden House Compound identified two factors as hindering access to portable
water. These factors are administration problem and failure in community participation.

Administration problem

Some of the respondents interviewed are of the view that there are problems in administration
that hinder access to portable and basic sanitation. Some other groups believe that people in the
community do not have the capability to do anything concerning water and sanitation than
drinking the water they get nearby. These groups of respondents think that the community has
striven to their up most to access potable water and basic sanitation but that the government is
not responding to the needs of the community.

Failure in community participation

Failure in community participation was one of the hindering factors for not having potable water
and basic sanitation in the community. The failure to involve the community in development
activities has been a very significant factor in not having access to potable water and basic
sanitation. The people in the community perceive that they do not have any role in the
development of overall infrastructures in Garden House. This makes them wait for what the
government can bring to them. As the respondents said the community members are becoming
dependent only on what the government provides them with, rather than contributing their efforts
in the development of the area.

Factors hindering access to potable water and basic sanitation in Garden House
Compound, Lusaka, Zambia

When respondents were asked if they know why they do not have access to potable water and
basic sanitation, they forwarded the following reasons. Some of the factors given do not have
any scientific grounds which may not be sound reasons in professionals’ point of view. Some of
the community members believe that having a toilet is a good thing which inspires them as they
are modernized. Having a toilet makes them feel a fend provides privacy during defecation.
There are still some factors which prevent them from having their own latrines. These factors are
discussed below which is given by the respondents.

As Figure 11 shows, 43.3 percent of the respondents are not able to build their own toilet
because it is too expensive. Another 30 percent have another toilet available. These toilets may
belong to their neighbors or relatives since they do not have their own. Other groups of people
are those who do not have a proper place to build a toilet.
DISCUSSIONS OF THE FINDINGS
5.1 Introduction
Other than the above reasons, there are also factors which prevent the community members from
building their own toilets such as, lack of facilities, time and ability and factors related to land.
Time and ability

The toilets in the community that are constructed by the household owners are simply done by
digging a hole in the ground and lining it with wood. Some people give the reason for not having
a toilet as not having the time and ability to dig a hole for a toilet. This is because:
They have to go out and look for employment and those that already have jobs report for work
and so digging of a toilet would be an additional job to do. Additionally, they are not capable,
financially, of building the toilet if they have to pay those who do the digging.

Lack of facilities

In the building of a pit latrine, there are some necessary building materials that are required such as
cement, steel and other materials are necessary. However, some pit latrines in Garden House Compound
are not durably constructed.
The materials required for latrine construction are quite expensive in comparison to the community’s
household income which, at times does not even cover their expenses for food and other basic
necessities. As a result, even if the community members build their own latrines, they do not last long.
It is because they build a simple pit latrine based on their knowledge with the local available materials
which is destroyed when the rains arrive.
Factors related to land

As the researcher observed, people in the community build their pit latrines on their own land.
The difficult ground and soil condition which makes it difficult to dig deeply, means that alatrine
rapidly becomes full, and a new one has to be dug. Consequently, some people use the lack of
suitable land as an excuse for not constructing a toilet of their own.
Benefits of improving access to water and sanitation
According to Postnote (2002) increasing access to water and sanitation is an input of
development and poverty reduction. This is because it has major health benefits, as well as
associated social, economic and environmental benefits. Public health will be guaranteed if there
is access to potable water and basic sanitation since the highest causes of illness and death in a
developing country is related to poor access to potable water and basic sanitation. As a result of
this, illness and deaths reduce the productivity of the economy of a nation. Poor sanitation has an
adverse effect on the environment which, in turn, may affect the source of the economy, like
agriculture and tourism.

As Hutton & Haller has stated, one of the major benefits of water and sanitation improvements is
the time saving associated with better access. Time savings may occur due to the relocation of a
well or borehole to a site closer to user communities, the installation of piped water supply to
households, closer access to latrines and shorter waiting times at public latrines. These time
savings translate into either increased production, improved education levels or more leisure
time.

Improved water supply reduces diarrhea morbidity by 6 to 25 percent, and improved sanitation
reduces morbidity by 32 percent (WHO cited in Omya Healthcare limited, 2009). This clearly
shows that the improvement on water supply and sanitation has a direct and concrete impact on
health. The occurrence of diarrheal diseases caused by unsafe drinking water and improper
sanitation would be reduced if improvements were made in water and sanitation. Since diarrheal
diseases are highly associated with unsafe drinking water and poor sanitation, the improvements
would, therefore, have a significant outcome.

The improvements in water supply and sanitation also have an impact on poverty and the
economy, as it is logical that only healthy people are strong enough to work and fulfill their
needs. As Hutton, G., et al (2007) stated that the improvement to water and sanitation will have
economic benefits of three types: direct economic benefits of avoiding diarrheal diseases,
indirect economic benefits related to health improvements and non-health benefits related to
improvements in water and sanitation. The direct economic benefits of avoiding diarrheal
diseases include cost savings due to the reduced incidence of diarrheal disease, full health care
costs, and non-health sector direct costs. The indirect economic benefits include productivity
effects of improved health and the non-health benefits.
Table 4: primary and economic impacts associated with improved sanitation options (WSP-EPA,
2008)

Improvement Primary impacts Economic impacts

Closer latrine access
and improved latrine
population ratio
• Less open defecation
• Less latrine access time
• Intangible user benefits
• Improved health status due
to less exposure
pathogens
• Less use of public latrines
• Saved health care costs
• Improved visual effects
and smells
• Increases school
participation
to
• Better living standards
• House hold in come rises
• Labor productivity

• Value of saved lives

5.2 Water and sanitation versus development

The inclusion of access to potable water and basic sanitation in the MDGs for sustainable
development shows that water and sanitation are important development indicators. It is a fact
that infrastructure development and socio-economic development are much related.
Infrastructure development may include road construction, water and sanitation improvements,
and irrigation development. Thus, having access to such services is considered as a precondition
for economic development. Accordingly, water and sanitation infrastructures also have impact
on the economic, social and human development of a nation.

UNDP (2006) has stated that the water and sanitation crisis has a role of reducing income
poverty. National governments are very aware of the expenditure that is needed in order to
increase the access to improved water and sanitation, but they may not be curious about the
economic costs of the negative consequences of unimproved water and sanitation. The child
mortality rate is high due to lack of access to safe drinking water and appropriate sanitation, and
this can be reduced if there was an increase in the access to safe drinking water and proper
sanitation.Poorwaterandsanitationhasresultedinmanypeopleintheworldbeinginsecure.

Access to clean water and sanitation is also a means to reducing health related costs, improving
girl’s education, and also ensuring a sense of human dignity. Generally, access to clean water
and improved sanitation can lead to all human development goals’ achievement. Measures that
can betaken

There are various measures that have been taken over the last years and several more are planned
to be taken in the near future in order to improve the water supply services in peri-urban areas.
NWASCO and the private investors have funded these measures. In order to secure a good
service with sufficient infrastructure and keep up with the population growth in the long run,
commercial utilities must have a sustainable way of funding their measures.
Some additional measures to be secured could be:

1. Increased promotion of payments of bills by customers.

2. Enhanced education of locals to emphasize the value of safe water.

3. Increased engagement of government and private investors in financial funding.

It is vital to secure the payment of bills by customers. It is essential to emphasize the importance
of education in the work of providing locals with safe water. If the local people are well aware of
the impact of different water qualities on the health system, they are more likely to prioritize
quality over price and, as a result, choose commercial utility services. Education being important
will enhance the chances of people getting employed. With this they get a steady income which
enables them to pay for the water.

Increasing the financial engagement of the government in commercial utility services is another
way that can be done to secure the payment of bills. This could either be done through
subsidizing parts of the expenses to lower the costs of the customers or through a fully
governmental financing via taxes. However, due to corruption, it is difficult to secure sustainable
funding from the government. Therefore, in order to achieve sustainable governmental financing,
there is a need to first fight the corruption, which of course is a major challenge in itself.
If payment of bills is secured and the number of paying customer is increased, private companies
are more likely to invest in the utilities since the private companies’ chances of making a profit will
be enhanced.

According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (2011), the government of the
Republic of Zambia has, together with other countries, stated goals and targets for an improved
water supply situation. These are part of the Millennium Development Goals and they aim to halve
the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation by
2015.

In 2005, the government of Zambia initiated the process of preparing Vision 2030, since it aspires
to become a prosperous middle-income country. One of the goals in the Vision 2030 is to have
clean and safe water supply and sanitation for all by 2030 (The Government of Zambia, 2006).

The government of Zambia devolved their authority of water supply to increase the efficiency
and effectiveness in this service sector before the turn of the millennium. This was done through
commercialization. Commercialization is to manage public sector institutions according to
private sector principles. In this way, the government maintains the ownership but delegates the
right to operate the water utilities to private companies. As a result, a combination of private
sector effectiveness and authority surveillance is achieved. NWASCO(2014) states that there are
72 local authorities that have established commercial water utilities to provide water and
sanitation services.
The main problems the commercial utilities and local authorities face are:

1. Demand is higher than the production and distribution capacity.

2. Dilapidated and aged infrastructure.

3. Water losses.

4. Urbanizationandpopulationgrowthisfasterthaninfrastructuraldevelopment.

5. Limited investment capacity both from the government and other investors.
 6. Vandalism.

7. Consumer disability to pay for the water.

One of the main challenges that are faced by the commercial water utilities in Zambia today is
that the demand is higher than the production and distribution capacity. As a result, people are
sometimes left without enough water for drinking, cleaning and cooking. This in turn forces
them to use other unsafe water sources. To increase the water production to meet the current and
future demand, the commercial water utilities in Zambia are aiming to increase their output at the
Kafue, Zambezi and Chongwe River and also, in the future, strategically drill more bore holes.
To be able to meet the demand, utilities also need to improve the human resource productivity
(Sikalinda, 2014). The problem is however that many commercial utilities cannot afford paying
salaries that are competitive with private companies. Even though they manage to recruit
competent workers, many of them often leave for better paid work in other companies.
Therefore, more and more utilities are introducing performance rewarding systems to motivate
the personnel (NWASCO, 2014).

With the transfer of water supply by the government of Zambia in the turn of the millennium, all
commercial utilities and local authorities were left within adequate infrastructure from the former
authority. This left the systems deficient and suffers from water losses, i.e. non revenue water
(Sikalinda, 2014). It is important to note that the speed of infrastructural development for water
supply has not been high enough compared to the speed of population growth. This has resulted
in the service delivery to be insufficient. In some areas, there has been complete lack of water
supply systems. Due to the inadequate infrastructure and missing water supply systems,
individuals and companies have started to drill boreholes in discriminately which have resulted
in depletion of the underground water (NWASCO, 2014).

In order to address the problems of the infrastructure development in relation to the growing
population, an increase in government funding for the water sector is needed (NWASCO, 2014).
According to MrTopsy Sikalinda at the Lusaka Water and Sewerage Company Limited, the
government rarely prioritizes the water sector when it comes to financial investments and the
funding is therefore inadequate (Sikalinda, 2014). However the National Water Supply and
Sanitation Council, NWASCO, established a fund in 2003 to assist the commercial water supply
and sewerage utilities financially. In this way, the commercial utilities have been able to extend
their services to peri-urban areas, (NWASCO, 2014).

To decrease the earlier mentioned water losses, commercial utilities plan to make district and
domestic meter installations, improve the network efficiency with leak control, repair networks
where it is possible and replace aged distribution networks. To be able to do this they will get
financial support from the World Bank (Sikalinda, 2014).

The high rate of vandalism of water stations is also a problem the utilities face. Vandalism is
caused by people, who are not able to pay for the water, trying to illegally access the water. This,
of course, decreases the efficiency of the water services and brings unnecessary costs that the
utilities cannot afford. However, the commercial utilities are cooperating with local authorities in
development planning which has made the locals more involved and as a result the rate of
vandalism has decreased (Sikalinda, 2014).

Another main challenge that impacts the quality of the service is incomplete payment of water
bills by locals. To promote payment of bills by consumers, NWASCO has been engaging various
stakeholders and commercial utilities are defining debt management strategies. However, this
needs to be a continuous process (NWASCO, 2014).
To summarize, the measures so far taken are:

1. Increased out put at key rivers and drilling of more boreholes.

2. Extended services and increased amount of water and sanitation projects (funding
fromNWASCO).

3. Domestic and district meter installations, leak control, repairing and replacing of already
established networks (funding from World Bank).

4. Engagement of stakeholders and development of dept management strategies to promote

payment of bills by locals (Done by NWASCO and the commercial utilities).
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusion
In the data collection process, the data was collected on a house-to-house basis. Only 40
percent male respondents were included because most of them had to go to work. Most of
the women had to stay home and look after the children and do house chores. As a result,
more females were included in the study. The females included in the household survey
were either because their husbands were not at home or their husbands were unable to
respond because of lack of time. As it is clearly seen from the discussion above,
household size and household income were considered as determining factors for water
demand and use.

The source of water for washing, drinking, cooking and other household activities are
publictaps. Very few individuals have piped water in their dwelling or piped water in the
yard. During the research, the researcher came across only one household that has a
borehole. Rain water is another source of water, although it is limited only to the rainy
season.

The responsibility for collecting water from these sources is almost on the shoulders of
women, while their frequency of visits to the water sources depends on the amount of
water they need per day. The worst case for the responsibility of fetching water is children
whose ages are less than 15, when they are supposed to be at school.

Most of them agreed about the poor quality of water but very few of them treated their
drinking water, for which lack of awareness, time shortage, and being reluctant are some
of the reasons given.
The members of Garden House Compound identified community participation, other
infrastructure problems and lack of awareness as some points listed under reasons for poor
accessibility to potable water and basic sanitation.

1
Recommendations
Based on the findings and analysis discussed in chapter three, the following recommendations
are given:

a. Water, sanitation and hygiene education programmes should be in place. As it can

be seen from the findings and analysis, the community has not received any
awareness from the authorities concerning water and sanitation.
b. The education given to the community should focus on attitudinal changes
towards water treatment by boiling and adding chlorine for those that can afford it
and building their own toilets.
c. There should be a focus on creating awareness concerning consequences of using
poor quality water and unimproved sanitation systems. From the discussion, some
people in the community do not have positive attitudes towards the treatment of
water. Thus, the awareness creating campaign and training would have a
significant role in shaping the community’s mindset.
d. Community participation should be encouraged. The community, as well as the
authorities and various stake holders, should work together to better the situation
in Garden House Compound. Community mobilization will enhance the
community’s role in development of their local place.
e. The long term measure is that the local authority should work on creating and
expanding the water scheme projects to Garden House Compound and encourage
NGOs to work in the development sectors.
In the short term, people in Garden House Compound have to be secure from the negative
consequences of the poor access to potable water and basic sanitation. This can be done
through awareness-creating campaigns in order to minimize the community’s exposure to
preventable but easily communicable water borne, water related and poor sanitation
related diseases.
Recommended improvement measures from the community

The community members forwarded recommendations which may serve to

prevent negative consequences for the poor accessibility to potable water and basic

2
sanitation.

1. Government and people have to work together to improve the

infrastructural development in the area, if development is to be a reality.
Since the community members 1. have seen from experience, they
think they lag behind other districts in potable water

2. Accessibility because of unavailability of infrastructure. The respondents

recommended that the infrastructure can easily pave the way to ease access
to potable water supply and basic sanitation.
3. There are some trends of rehabilitating natural environments in the
country. This rehabilitation has to include water schemes. Thus,
strengthening water scheme rehabilitation can provide a solution to the
problem of unsafe drinking water in Garden House Compound. On top of
that, stakeholders should be strengthened and this includes health
institutions, educational institutions, finance and economic development
institutions which may facilitate the progress towards ease of access to
water supplies and sanitation, and minimize the negative consequences of
the current unsafe drinking water and poor sanitation. Though the
relationship between these institutions and water supplies and sanitation
seems to have less of a direct contribution, it is believed to have a
significant role in increasing water accessibility and minimizing the severe
consequences of unsafe drinking water and poor sanitation.
4. Despite the numberof NGOs that are operating in the country, there seems
to be no NGO that is currently carrying outworks of any sortin Garden
House Compound, as was observedby the respondents. Hence, what the
community members believe is, if the NGOs are working in development
activities which are currently in the country, this may increase their role in
alleviating the problems of poor access to potable water and basic
sanitation. Thus, the government has to encourage NGOs to increase their
roles in terms of money, training and knowledge transfers. On top of that,
the community members have to be aware of being part of the development
activity and this can be done through awareness creating campaigns and

3
 community mobilization.

REFERENCES

Ahsan, H. (2007). "Can information alone change behavior? Response to arsenic contamination
of groundwater in Bangladesh. Journal of Development Economics.

Burr, V. (2003). Social Constructionism (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Central Statistics Office. (2011). Zambia 2010 Census of Population and Housing
PreliminaryPopulation Figures: Central Statistics Office.

Chintu, C., Luo, C., Baboo, S., Khumalo-Ngwenya&Zumla,A. (1995). Intestinal parasites in
HIV-seropositive Zambian children with diarrhoea. J TropPediatr.

DFID (1998). DFID Guidance manual on water supply and sanitation programmes. London,
UK, DFID.

Dube, S. D. (1984). Acute bacterial diarrhoeas due to salmonella, shigella and

enteropathogenicEscherichia coli in Zambia. Med J Zambia, 18(3), 26-29.

Cole F.L. (1988). Content analysis: process and application. Clinical Nurse Specialist.

Evans, P. (1992). Paying the Piper: an overview of community financing of water and sanitation.
Delft: IRCInternational Water and Sanitation Centre.

Fewtrell, L. &Colford, J. M (2004). Water, sanitation and hygiene: interventions and diarrhoea:
asystematic review and meta-analysis. World Bank Health Nutrition and Population
Discussion Paper.

Glaeser, (2011). Triumph of the City: How our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer,
Smarter,Greener, Healthier and Happier. New York: The Penguin Press.

Government of the Republic of Zambia. (2015). National Urban and Peri-Urban

SanitationStrategy (2015-2030), Ministry of
Local Government and Housing (MLGH),
November 2015

4
J-PAL (2012). Urban Sanitation in Bhubaneswar: A Rapid Assessment of the city’s sanitation
facilities.Report Published by J-PAL South Asia at IFMR, Chennai, India.

National Water Supply and Sanitation Council (2015). Annual Report 2015. NWASCO, Zambia

Tayler, K., Parkinson, J. & Colin, J., (2003). Urban Sanitation: Guide to Strategic Planning,
Warwickshire,UK: Practical Action Publishing.

Taylor, B. (2009). Addressing the Sustainability Crisis. Lessons from Research on

ManagingRural Water Projects. Dar es Salaam: WaterAid.

UN Millenium Project (2005). Health, Dignity, and Development: What Will it Take?
London:Task Force on Water and Sanitation.

UNEP (2011). Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and

PovertyEradication. United Nations Environment Programme.

UN-Habitat. (2003). The Challenge of Slums: Global Report on Human Settlements 2003. United
NationsSettlementsProgramme (UN-Habitat).

UN-Habitat. (2003). Slums of the World: The Face of Urban Poverty in the New Millenium?
Working Paper.

UN-Habitat. (2008). State of the World's Cities 2010/2011: Bridging the Urban Divide. London.

Education Fund(2017). Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene: 2017 Update
andSDG Baselines. UNICEF and WHO, Geneva.

Water and Sanitation Program (2007) Improving Water Supply and Sanitation Services for the
UrbanPoor in India. The World Bank Guidance Notes.

Water Aid (2007). Water, Environmental Sanitation and Hygiene Programme for Urban
Poor.Water Aid and UN-Habitat.

WHO. (2006). Meeting the MDG Drinking Water and Sanitation Target: The Urban and Rural
Challengeof the Decade. World Health Organization and UNICEF.

WHO (2010).Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water, 2010. World Health Organization

andUNICEF.

5
APPENDICES

4.2 APPENDIX INFORMATION SHEET

INFORMATION SHEET FOR RESPONDENTS

Title of the study

To investigate people’s accessibility to safe and readily available water for drinking and
domestic use: a case study of garden house compound Lusaka Zambia.

Introduction

My name is Lully Kapini a student at Chreso University pursuing a bachelors of science in

public health, conducting a researchto investigate people’s accessibility to safe and readily
available water for drinking and domestic use: a case study of garden house compound Lusaka
Zambia. The study is going to be of help in understanding why people in peri-urban areas can
access clean water for drinking as well finding the solutions.

Purpose of the study

This study seeks to investigate people’s accessibility to safe and readily available water for
drinking and domestic use: a case study of garden house compound Lusaka Zambia, the findings
of this study will not only add to the knowledge base of this topic but will also serve as a basis
for possible policy adjustments to curb this public health problem.

To show your voluntary participation in this study, please sign and indicate todays, date on the
next page. Once you have consented, please attempt all sections of the questionnaire according to
the instructions provided at the beginning of each section.

Risk(s) and compensation:

While there are no known risks to you to the best of the researcher’s knowledge, as a participant
there will be no compensation in any form for participating in this study.

6
Benefits:

There is no direct benefit to you for participating in this study; however, the information gained
will be used in different ways to improve the health standard to the government.

CONTACT NUMBER: 0973649149

4.2.1 CONSENT FORM

Template

To investigate people’s accessibility to safe and readily available water for drinking and
domestic use: a case study of garden house compound Lusaka Zambia.

Consent to take part in research

I .......................................... voluntarily accept to take part in this research study

I understand that even if I agree to participate now, I can withdraw at any time or refuse to
answer without any consequences of any kind.

I understand that I can withdraw permission to use from my interview within a week after
interviews, in which case the material will be deleted

I have had the purpose and nature of the study explained to me in writing and I had the chance to
ask questions about the study.

I understand that the participation involves identifying the places for collecting data in garden
house compound.

I understand that I will not benefit directly from participating in this research.

I understand that all information provided for this study will be treated confidentially.

I understand that in any report on the result of this research my identity will remain anonymous.

7
I understand that disguised extract from my interview may be quoted in academic purposes.

I understand that signed consent forms and original will be returned to the institution academic
purposes.

I understand that a transcript of my interview in which all identifying information has been
removed will be returned.

I understand that under freedom of information legalization, I am entitled to access the

information I have provided at any time while it is in storage as specified above.

I understand that I am free to contact any of the people involved in this research.

Names, degree, affiliations and contact details of researchers (and academic supervisors when
relevant.

SIGNATURE OF PARTICIPANT DATE

…………………………………………………….

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCHER

…………..…………..DATE…………………….

I believe the participant is giving informed consent to participate in this study.

SIGNATURE OF PARTICIPANT DATE

………………………………………..……

SIGNATURE OF RESEARCHER

…………….…………..DATE………..…………….

I believe the participant is giving informed consent to participate in this study.

8
4.3APPENDIX 2

Questionnaires personal information

Your opinion is important to us and by answering this survey: you will help us meet academic
requirements and also help relevant authorities and regulators become aware of the prevailing
scenario in Zambia.

SECTION A-personal information

1.Age

15-19years 20-24 years 25-29 years 30-34 years

35-39 years 40-44 years 45-49 years 50-54 years
55-54years 55- 59years 60-64 + years
2. What is your gender?
Male Female

3. What is your marital status?

Single Married Divorced Widow Separated

4. What is your occupation?
Secondary school student College / University level
School leaver Formally employed Informally employed

9
SECTION B

People’s accessibility to safe drinking water and readily available for domestic use

i. Tell me something about water and sanitation challenges in this area

ii. what are the major challenges when it comes to accessing clean and safe water?
iii. How does inadequate access to safe water affect your livelihood?
iv. Please tell me what you think are the major causes of water problems in this area
v. How have you been surviving in a water crisis situation? (probe for alternatives
among residents, is it boles etc
vi. What has government and the leadership of this community done in the view of
faced water challenges?
vii. Please tell me in your view, what you think should be done by both your
community leaders and national leaders in advocating for equal access to safe
water and sanitation
viii. In conclusion Let’s summarize some of the key points from the discussion. Is there
anything else? Do you have any questions?

Thank you very much for your time and participation.

10
 4.4 BUDGET

ITEM COST (K)

1 ream of paper 70
Transport 500
Printing and binding 1,000
Contingent costs 700
Meals and Refreshments 500
Supervisor
Rec
TOTAL K 2,770

4.5 WORK TIMELINE

Task to accomplish April May June July August September

Distribution of
questionnaires
Data collection
Data analysis
Data analysis
Data analysis and Report
writing
Report submission

11