Literature DB >> 29100137

Sanitation marketing: A systematic review and theoretical critique using the capability approach.

D J Barrington1, S Sridharan2, K F Shields3, S G Saunders2, R T Souter4, J Bartram3.   

Abstract

Sanitation is a human right that benefits health. As such, technical and behavioural interventions are widely implemented to increase the number of people using sanitation facilities. These include sanitation marketing interventions (SMIs), in which external support agencies (ESAs) use a hybrid of commercial and social marketing tools to increase supply of, and demand for, sanitation products and services. However, there is little critical discourse on SMIs, or independent rigorous analysis on whether they increase or reduce well-being. Most available information is from ESAs about their own SMI implementation. We systematically reviewed the grey and peer-reviewed literature on sanitation marketing, including qualitatively analysing and calculating descriptive statistics for the parameters measured, or intended to be measured, in publications reporting on 33 SMIs. Guided by the capability approach to development we identified that publications for most SMIs (n = 31, 94%) reported on commodities, whilst fewer reported on parameters related to impacts on well-being (i.e., functionings, n = 22, 67%, and capabilities, n = 20, 61%). When evaluating future SMIs, it may be useful to develop a list of contextualised well-being indicators for the particular SMI's location, taking into account local cultural norms, with this list ideally co-produced with local stakeholders. We identified two common practices in SMIs that can reduce well-being and widen well-being inequalities; namely, the promotion of conspicuous consumption and assaults on dignity, and we discuss the mechanisms by which such impacts occur. We recommend that ESAs understand sanitation marketing's potential to reduce well-being and design SMIs to minimize such detrimental impacts. Throughout the implementation phase ESAs should continuously monitor for well-being impacts and adapt practices to optimise well-being outcomes for all involved.
Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Consumption; Dignity; Human right; Status; WaSH; Well-being

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29100137     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.10.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  6 in total

1.  Improving Sanitation and Hygiene through Community-Led Total Sanitation: The Zambian Experience.

Authors:  Kojo Yeboah-Antwi; William B MacLeod; Godfrey Biemba; Patrick Sijenyi; Alexandra Höhne; Lavuun Verstraete; Caitryn M McCallum; Davidson H Hamer
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 2.345

2.  Learning from Failure in Environmental and Public Health Research.

Authors:  Dani J Barrington; Rebecca C Sindall; Esther L Shaylor
Journal:  Environ Health Insights       Date:  2022-06-06

3.  Health Risk Perceptions Are Associated with Domestic Use of Basic Water and Sanitation Services-Evidence from Rural Ethiopia.

Authors:  Carmen Anthonj; Lisa Fleming; Samuel Godfrey; Argaw Ambelu; Jane Bevan; Ryan Cronk; Jamie Bartram
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-09-26       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  How does sanitation influence people's quality of life? Qualitative research in low-income areas of Maputo, Mozambique.

Authors:  Ian Ross; Oliver Cumming; Robert Dreibelbis; Zaida Adriano; Rassul Nala; Giulia Greco
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2021-01-21       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  Drivers of menstrual material disposal and washing practices: A systematic review.

Authors:  Hannah Jayne Robinson; Dani Jennifer Barrington
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Acknowledging and Learning from Different Types of Failure.

Authors:  Naomi Vernon; Jamie Myers
Journal:  Environ Health Insights       Date:  2021-06-06
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.