Can mass media campaigns increase demand for renewable energy? Experimental evidence from Senegal

This paper examines public investment in mass media campaigns aimed at stimulating market-led growth within the renewable energy sector in a developing country setting. We run a randomized field experiment to estimate the impact of a large-scale information campaign on the adoption of renewable energy technology, which includes clips broadcasted on national radio and print materials distributed in rural villages in Senegal. While the radio campaign primarily influences the number of renewable energy products owned by existing users (intensive margin), the combination of radio and print significantly increases the number of new adopters (extensive margin). However, when scaled nationally, we calculate a meaningful advantage of the radio clips over the print materials in terms of the cost per additional sales of solar lamps. The study further introduces an innovative methodological approach for examining nationally broadcasted information campaigns, offering valuable insights for future research and policy evaluations

How Often Should We Believe Positive Results? Assessing the Credibility of Research Findings in Development Economics

Under-powered studies combined with low prior beliefs about intervention effects increase the chances that a positive result is overstated. We collect prior beliefs about intervention impacts from 125 experts to estimate the false positive and false negative report probabilities (FPRP and FNRP) as well as Type S (sign) and Type M (magnitude) errors for studies in development economics. We find that the large majority of studies in our sample are generally credible. We discuss how more systematic collection and use of prior expectations could help improve the literature

Are there synergies from combining hygiene and sanitation promotion campaigns: Evidence from a large-scale cluster-randomized trial in rural Tanzania

<div><p>Summary</p><p>The current evidence on handwashing and sanitation programs suggests limited impacts on health when at-scale interventions have been tested in isolation. However, no published experimental evidence currently exists that tests the interaction effects between sanitation and handwashing. We present the results of two large-scale, government-led handwashing and sanitation promotion campaigns in rural Tanzania, with the objective of tracing the causal chain from hygiene and sanitation promotion to changes in child health outcomes and specifically testing for potential interaction effects of combining handwashing and sanitation interventions.</p><p>Methods</p><p>The study is a factorial cluster-randomized control trial where 181 rural wards from 10 districts in Tanzania were randomly assigned to receive sanitation promotion, handwashing promotion, both interventions together or neither (control). Interventions were rolled out from February 2009 to June 2011 and the endline survey was conducted from May to November 2012, approximately one year after program completion. The sample was composed of households with children under 5 years old in the two largest villages in each ward. Masking was not possible due to the nature of the intervention, but enumerators played no part in the intervention and were blinded to treatment status. The primary outcome of interest was 7-day diarrhea prevalence for children under five. Intermediate outcomes of behavior change including improved latrine construction, levels of open defecation and handwashing with soap were also analyzed. Secondary health outcomes included anemia, height-for-age and weight-for-age of children under 5. An intention-to-treat analysis was used to assess the relationship between the interventions and outcomes of interest.</p><p>Findings</p><p>One year after the end of the program, ownership of improved latrines increased from 49.7% to 64.8% (95% CI 57.9%-71.7%) and regular open defecation decreased from 23.1% to 11.1% (95% CI 3.5%-18.7%) in sanitation promotion-only wards. Households in handwashing promotion-only wards showed marginal improvements in handwashing behavior related to food preparation but not at other critical junctures. There were no detectable interaction effects for the combined intervention. The associated cost-per-household gaining access to improved sanitation is estimated to be USD $194. Final effects on child health measured through diarrhea, anemia, stunting and wasting were absent in all treatment groups.</p><p>Interpretation</p><p>Although statistically significant, the changes in intermediate outcomes achieved through each intervention in isolation were not large enough to generate meaningful health impacts. With no observable signs of interaction, the combined intervention produced similar results. The study highlights the importance of focusing on intermediate outcomes of take up and behavior change as a critical first step in large-scale programs before realizing the changes in health that sanitation and hygiene interventions aim to deliver.</p><p>Trial registration</p><p>Clinicaltrials.gov <a href="https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01465204" target="_blank">NCT01465204</a></p></div

Health.

<p>Health.</p

CONSORT flowchart—Enrollment, intervention coverage, and analysis of participants.

<p>CONSORT flowchart—Enrollment, intervention coverage, and analysis of participants.</p

Descriptive statistics.

<p>Descriptive statistics.</p

Sanitation improvements.

<p>Sanitation improvements.</p

Handwashing and hygiene.

<p>Handwashing and hygiene.</p

Effects of a community-driven water, sanitation and hygiene intervention on water and sanitation infrastructure, access, behaviour, and governance: a cluster-randomised controlled trial in rural Democratic Republic of Congo

Introduction Inadequate water and sanitation is a central challenge in global health. Since 2008, the Democratic Republic of Congo government has implemented a national programme, Healthy Villages and Schools (Villages et Ecoles Assainis (VEA), with support from UNICEF, financed by UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.Methods A cluster-level randomised controlled trial of VEA was implemented throughout 2019 across 332 rural villages, grouped into 50 treatment and 71 control clusters. Primary outcomes included time spent collecting water; quantity of water collected; prevalence of improved primary source of drinking water; and prevalence of improved primary defecation site. Secondary outcomes included child health, water governance, water satisfaction, handwashing practices, sanitation practices, financial cost of water, school attendance and water storage practices. All outcomes were self-reported. The primary analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis, using linear models. Outcomes were measured October–December 2019, median 5 months post-intervention.Results The programme increased access to improved water sources by 33 percentage points (pp) (95% CI 22 to 45), to improved sanitation facilities by 26 pp (95% CI 14 to 37), and improved water governance by 1.3 SDs (95% CI 1.1 to 1.5), water satisfaction by 0.6 SD (95% CI 0.4 to 0.9), handwashing practices by 0.5 SD (95% CI 0.3 to 0.7) and sanitation practices by 0.3 SD (95% CI 0.1 to 0.4). There was no significant difference in financial cost of water, school attendance, child health or water storage practices.Conclusion VEA produced large increases in access to and satisfaction with water and sanitation services, in self-reported hygiene and sanitation behaviour, and in measures of water governance.Trial registration number AEARCTR-0004648; American Economic Association RCT registry