IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pwat00/0000583.html

How much are households willing to invest in hand hygiene enabling technologies? A randomised pricing experiment in Lusaka, Zambia

Author

Listed:
  • Katherine Davies
  • Katayi Mwila-Kazimbaya
  • Ian Ross
  • Elisabeth Tadiri
  • Jenala Chipungu
  • Robert Dreibelbis

Abstract

Access to a dedicated handwashing facility (HWF) increases handwashing with soap (HWWS), an effective behaviour for preventing respiratory and diarrheal disease. Achieving universal hand hygiene will require household investment of a HWF, yet the ability and willingness of end-users to meet these costs has received little attention in stated or revealed preference studies. This two-phase voucher-based randomised pricing experiment explored whether households in peri-urban Lusaka, Zambia were willing to invest in a HWF. In Phase 1, three HWFs were tested with 60 households using two of the three HWFs for two weeks (20 households per combination). There was strong preference for a locally manufactured bucket with a tap and metal stand (“Kalingalinga bucket”) (250 ZMW, ~ $10), over high-cost (1000 ZMW, ~ $38) and low-cost (100 ZMW, ~ $4) pre-manufactured HWFs. In Phase 2, n = 160 used the Kalingalinga bucket for two weeks. At the end of the trial period, participants received a 50 ZMW gift (~$2) and a randomly assigned discount voucher (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%; 40 households per group), before deciding whether to purchase the HWF. Ninety-eight percent (39/40) of households offered an 80% discount purchased the HWF (effective price: 0 ZMW), compared with 30% (12/40) offered a 20% discount (effective price: 150 ZMW). Predictive modelling estimated that 50% of households would purchase at an effective price of 103 ZMW (~40% of the retail price). Despite declining the purchase offer, all non-purchasing households reported positive stated willingness-to-pay, suggesting latent demand. Findings highlight the need for financial interventions that make desirable HWFs affordable.

Suggested Citation

  • Katherine Davies & Katayi Mwila-Kazimbaya & Ian Ross & Elisabeth Tadiri & Jenala Chipungu & Robert Dreibelbis, 2026. "How much are households willing to invest in hand hygiene enabling technologies? A randomised pricing experiment in Lusaka, Zambia," PLOS Water, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(8), pages 1-14, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pwat00:0000583
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pwat.0000583
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/water/article?id=10.1371/journal.pwat.0000583
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/water/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pwat.0000583&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000583?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Sarah F. Small & Steven Pressman, 2024. "Introduction to the Symposium Celebrating Fifty Years of the Eastern Economic Association," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 50(4), pages 436-440, October.
    3. Wiebke Roß & Jens Weghake, 2018. "Wa(h)re Liebe: Was Online-Dating-Plattformen über zweiseitige Märkte lehren," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0017, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    4. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    5. Boyce, Christopher & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick, 2019. "Personality and economic choices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 82-100.
    6. Heavey, Emily & Baxter, Kate & Birks, Yvonne, 2019. "Financial advice for funding later life care: a scoping review of evidence from England," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 91497, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Arlen, Jennifer H. & Tontrup, Stephan, 2015. "Strategic Bias Shifting: Herding as a Behaviorally Rational Response to Regret Aversion," EconStor Preprints 335573, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    8. Damgaard, Mette Trier & Nielsen, Helena Skyt, 2018. "Nudging in education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 313-342.
    9. Silva,Joana C. G. & Morgandi,Matteo & Levin,Victoria, 2016. "Trust in government and support for redistribution," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7675, The World Bank.
    10. Chorvat, Terrence, 2006. "Taxing utility," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-16, February.
    11. Karle, Heiko & Schumacher, Heiner & Vølund, Rune, 2023. "Consumer loss aversion and scale-dependent psychological switching costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 214-237.
    12. Westberg, Nina Bruvik & Skjeflo, Sofie Waage & Kallbekken, Steffen, 2025. "The power of information: A survey experiment on public support for electricity price compensation schemes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    13. Besedes, Tibor & Deck, Cary & Sarangi, Sudipta & Shor, Mikhael, 2012. "Designing a sequential choice architecture to reduce choice overload," MPRA Paper 38173, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Lippens, Louis & Baert, Stijn & Derous, Eva, 2021. "Loss aversion in taste-based employee discrimination: Evidence from a choice experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    15. Basu, Arnab K. & Chau, Nancy H. & Lin, Gary C., 2026. "On migration gravity with status quo bias and job search frictions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    16. Keval Amin & Erica Harris, 2022. "The Effect of Investor Sentiment on Nonprofit Donations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(2), pages 427-450, January.
    17. Michael Ziegelmeyer & Julius Nick, 2013. "Backing out of private pension provision: lessons from Germany," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 505-539, August.
    18. Walter Bossert & Yves Sprumont, 2009. "Non‐Deteriorating Choice," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 76(302), pages 337-363, April.
    19. Edward H. Chang & Erika L. Kirgios, 2024. "Demographic “Stickiness”: The Demographic Identity of Departing Group Members Influences Who Is Chosen to Replace Them," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(7), pages 4236-4259, July.
    20. Elie Matta & Jean McGuire, 2008. "Too Risky to Hold? The Effect of Downside Risk, Accumulated Equity Wealth, and Firm Performance on CEO Equity Reduction," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 567-580, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pwat00:0000583. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: water (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/water .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.