Bulletin of the World Health Organization (Aug 2009)

Shame or subsidy revisited: social mobilization for sanitation in Orissa, India

  • Subhrendu K Pattanayak,
  • Jui-Chen Yang,
  • Katherine L Dickinson,
  • Christine Poulos,
  • Sumeet R Patil,
  • Ranjan K Mallick,
  • Jonathan L Blitstein,
  • Purujit Praharaj

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 87, no. 8
pp. 580 – 587

Abstract

Read online

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of a sanitation campaign that combines "shaming" (i.e. emotional motivators) with subsidies for poor households in rural Orissa, an Indian state with a disproportionately high share of India's child mortality. METHODS: Using a cluster-randomized design, we selected 20 treatment and 20 control villages in the coastal district of Bhadrak, rural Orissa, for a total sample of 1050 households. We collected sanitation and health data before and after a community-led sanitation project, and we used a difference-in-difference estimator to determine the extent to which the campaign influenced the number of households building and using a latrine. FINDINGS: Latrine ownership did not increase in control villages, but in treatment villages it rose from 6% to 32% in the overall sample, from 5% to 36% in households below the poverty line (eligible for a government subsidy) and from 7% to 26% in households above the poverty line (not eligible for a government subsidy). CONCLUSION: Subsidies can overcome serious budget constraints but are not necessary to spur action, for shaming can be very effective by harnessing the power of social pressure and peer monitoring. Through a combination of shaming and subsidies, social marketing can improve sanitation worldwide.