Consumer preferences for household water treatment products in Andhra Pradesh, India.

Over 5 billion people worldwide are exposed to unsafe water. Given the obstacles to ensuring sustainable improvements in water supply infrastructure and the unhygienic handling of water after collection, household water treatment and storage (HWTS) products have been viewed as important mechanisms for increasing access to safe water. Although studies have shown that HWTS technologies can reduce the likelihood of diarrheal illness by about 30%, levels of adoption and continued use remain low. An understanding of household preferences for HWTS products can be used to create demand through effective product positioning and social marketing, and ultimately improve and ensure commercial sustainability and scalability of these products. However, there has been little systematic research on consumer preferences for HWTS products. This paper reports the results of the first state-of-the-art conjoint analysis study of HWTS products. In 2008, we conducted a conjoint analysis survey of a representative sample of households in Andhra Pradesh (AP), India to elicit and quantify household preferences for commercial HWTS products. Controlling for attribute non-attendance in an error components mixed logit model, the study results indicate that the most important features to respondents, in terms of the effect on utility, were the type of product, followed by the extent to which the product removes pathogens, the retail outlet and, the time required to treat 10 L. Holding all other product attributes constant, filters were preferred to combination products and chemical additives. Department stores and weekly markets were the most favorable sales outlets, followed by mobile salespeople. In general, households do not prefer to purchase HWTS products at local shops. Our results can inform the types of products and sales outlets that are likely to be successful in commercial HWTS markets in AP, as well as the influence of different pricing and financing strategies on product demand and uptake.

[1]  Kathryn A Phillips,et al.  An experiment on simplifying conjoint analysis designs for measuring preferences. , 2003, Health economics.

[2]  Lori Hutwagner,et al.  Diarrhea prevention through household-level water disinfection and safe storage in Zambia. , 2002, The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene.

[3]  Mickael Bech,et al.  Does the number of choice sets matter? Results from a web survey applying a discrete choice experiment. , 2011, Health economics.

[4]  John M. Rose,et al.  Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer , 2005 .

[5]  J. Swait,et al.  The Influence of Task Complexity on Consumer Choice: A Latent Class Model of Decision Strategy Switching , 2001 .

[6]  Jesse M. Shapiro,et al.  Can Higher Prices Stimulate Product Use? Evidence from a Field Experiment in Zambia , 2010 .

[7]  S. Luby,et al.  Difficulties in bringing point-of-use water treatment to scale in rural Guatemala. , 2008, The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene.

[8]  Trudy Ann Cameron,et al.  Differential Attention to Attributes in Utility-theoretic Choice Models , 2010 .

[9]  Philip Kotler,et al.  Social Marketing: Influencing Behaviors for Good , 1989 .

[10]  Sandy Cairncross,et al.  Reducing diarrhea through the use of household-based ceramic water filters: a randomized, controlled trial in rural Bolivia. , 2004, The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene.

[11]  F. Reed Johnson,et al.  Experimental Design For Stated-Choice Studies , 2006 .

[12]  John M Colford,et al.  Water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions to reduce diarrhoea in less developed countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2005, The Lancet. Infectious diseases.

[13]  John M. Rose,et al.  Combining RP and SP data: biases in using the nested logit ‘trick’: contrasts with flexible mixed logit incorporating panel and scale effects , 2008 .

[14]  M. Ryan.  Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation. , 1999, Social science & medicine.

[15]  Dale Whittington,et al.  RELIABILITY OF STATED PREFERENCES FOR CHOLERA AND TYPHOID VACCINES WITH TIME TO THINK IN HUE, VIETNAM , 2006 .

[16]  R. Beach,et al.  Preferences for Public Lands Management under Competing Uses: The Case of Yellowstone National Park , 2008, Land Economics.

[17]  Dale Whittington,et al.  Administering contingent valuation surveys in developing countries , 1996 .

[18]  Kent Willis,et al.  Willingness To Pay For Water Service Improvements In Middle-Income Urban Households In South Africa: A Stated Choice Analysis , 2008 .

[19]  Carsten Lynge Jensen,et al.  Attending to the Reasons for Attribute Non-attendance in Choice Experiments , 2011 .

[20]  Christine Poulos,et al.  Mothers' preferences and willingness to pay for vaccinating daughters against human papillomavirus. , 2010, Vaccine.

[21]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Modelling attribute non-attendance in choice experiments for rural landscape valuation , 2009 .

[22]  Alexander Pfaff,et al.  Behavior, Environment, and Health in Developing Countries: Evaluation and Valuation , 2009 .

[23]  C. Poulos,et al.  Mothers' preferences and willingness to pay for HPV vaccines in Vinh Long Province, Vietnam. , 2011, Social science & medicine.

[24]  Stefano Farolfi,et al.  Household preferences for multiple use water services in rural areas of South Africa: an analysis based on choice modeling , 2008 .

[25]  Anna Hurlimann,et al.  Urban Australians Using Recycled Water for Domestic Non-Potable Use — An Evaluation of the Attributes Price, Saltiness, Colour and Odour Using Conjoint Analysis , 2007, Journal of environmental management.

[26]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Monitoring Choice Task Attribute Attendance in Nonmarket Valuation of Multiple Park Management Services: Does It Matter? , 2010, Land Economics.

[27]  Subhrendu K. Pattanayak,et al.  Of taps and toilets: quasi-experimental protocol for evaluating community-demand-driven projects. , 2009, Journal of water and health.

[28]  Dale Whittington,et al.  Coping with unreliable public water supplies: Averting expenditures by households in Kathmandu, Nepal , 2005 .

[29]  Katherine L. Dickinson,et al.  Shame or subsidy revisited: social mobilization for sanitation in Orissa, India. , 2009, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[30]  Joel Huber,et al.  A General Method for Constructing Efficient Choice Designs , 1996 .

[31]  D. Hensher,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications , 2000 .

[32]  Subhrendu K. Pattanayak,et al.  Unpackaging Demand for Water Service Quality: Evidence from Conjoint Surveys in Sri Lanka , 2006 .

[33]  Danny Campbell,et al.  Attribute processing in environmental choice analysis: implications for willingness to pay , 2010 .