What factors impact the effectiveness of emergency WASH interventions?
Attachments
Download document Highlights
This brief is based on a forthcoming systematic review on Short-term WASH interventions in emergency response: a systematic review, by Yates et al. The review synthesised findings from 106 published and grey literature papers that evaluated 114 WSAH interventions across 39 low- and middleincome countries. The current state of evidence shows that most of the available evidence addresses the question of whether or not these interventions works, but little addresses long-term effectiveness or if the intervention had the intended impacts or not.
The numbers of people affected by natural disasters, disease outbreaks and conflict are on the rise.
Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions in emergency contexts have been shown to help reduce the risk of disease by providing safe water, reducing open defecation and promoting good hygiene practices. However, the evidence is limited, forcing responders to rely on past experiences or extrapolate evidence from development settings.
A recent 3ie-funded systematic review examined the effectiveness of WASH interventions targeting disaster-affected populations in low- and middleincome countries. This assessed health outcomes; use of health services’ non-health outcomes, such as ease of use or quality of life; contextual barriers and facilitators to implementation and adoption; and cost-effectiveness.
Main findings
Water dispensers and water treatment for households, and latrines and hygiene promotion were effective at the beneficiary level.
Pumping wells flooded with seawater is not effective in reducing salinity.
There was limited evidence that WASH interventions reduce disease risk.
Simple messages through multiple communication modes, timing of interventions and encouraging community involvement, among other factors, had an impact on the success of emergency interventions.
At the community level, perceptions and preferences of WASH interventions are influenced by taste and smell of treated water, and ease of use of promoted technologies.
Communities overestimated impacts of some WASH interventions, such as household spraying and well disinfection