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
Volume 87, Number 8, August 2009, 580-587
Table 4. DID estimates of the effect of an IEC sanitation campaign on potential household latrine ownership in Bhadrak, Orissa, India, 2005–2006
| Model 3a | Model 4b | |
|---|---|---|
| A: Full sample | ||
| No. of households/clusters | 2100/20 | 2100/20 |
| IEC effect (%) | 37.5 | 46.1 |
| 95% CIc | 23.8–51.3 | 31.1–61.1 |
| P-value | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| B: BPL only | ||
| No. of households/clusters | 1264/20 | 1264/20 |
| IEC effect (%) | 43.1 | 51.5 |
| 95% CIc | 28.4–57.8 | 36.9–66.1 |
| P-value | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| C: Non-BPL only | ||
| No. of households/clusters | 836/20 | 836/20 |
| IEC effect (%) | 29.3 | 38.2 |
| 95% CIc | 13.8–44.8 | 20.0–56.4 |
| P-value | 0.000 | 0.000 |
BPL, below the poverty line; CI, confidence interval; DID, difference-in-difference; IEC, information, education and communication.
a DID adding households that reported having started to build an individual household latrine at the time of the second survey.
b DID adding households that reported plans to build an individual household latrine within the next year.
c Standard errors were corrected for clustering at the village level.