Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The perceived effects of clean water infrastructure in Nasarawa State, Nigeria
(USC Thesis Other)
The perceived effects of clean water infrastructure in Nasarawa State, Nigeria
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
The Perceived Effects of Clean Water Infrastructure in Nasarawa State, Nigeria
by
Jason Townsell
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF POLICY, PLANNING, AND DEVELOPMENT
December 2024
Copyright 2024 Jason Townsell
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Completing this study would not have been possible without the unwavering support of
my wife and children, Brandy, Taya, Brandon, and Joshua. The professional and academic
support of my colleagues, cohort team, and research assistants has been invaluable in preparing
and enabling me to complete this project. The faculty and staff of the USC Price School of
Public Policy are the best; I am ecstatic to be associated with the Price team and am grateful for
all that I have gleaned from each of them. I want to acknowledge and thank my thesis committee,
Bill Leach, PhD, Peter Robertson, PhD, and Shirley Feldmann-Jensen, DPPD, MPH, each of
whom freely and competently volunteered their time and expertise. Finally, I would like to
acknowledge and dedicate this project to Dr. Chuga Samson, the head of the Committee on
Water Projects at Chuga and Friends Foundation, who unexpectedly and tragically passed away
during the completion of this dissertation. Without his vision and dedication, this project and the
water infrastructure intervention program in Nasarawa state, Nigeria, would not have been
possible.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................ii
LIST OF TABLES…..…………………………………………………………………………….v
LIST OF FIGURES……………………..………………………………………………………..vi
ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................................vii
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................1
Contextual Background & Research Problem……………………………….........2
Research Purpose and Question…………………………………………………...3
Research Hypothesis……………………………………………………………....4
Research Scope and Limitations…………………………………………………..5
Research Significance……………………………………………………………..5
Definition of Key Terms…………………………………………………………..5
Summary…………………………………………………………………………..7
Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW...................................................................................8
Goal, Scope, and Methodology……………………………………..……………..8
Demographics of Nigeria……………………………………………………….....9
Water Scarcity in Nigeria………………………………………………………...11
Water Quality and the Health Benefits of Clean Water………………………….15
Perceived Effects of Water Infrastructure Development………………………...17
Dimensions of Wellness…………………………………………………………20
Summary of Key Literature……………...………………………………………22
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….23
Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY...........................................................................................25
Philosophical Assumptions and Researcher Bias…………………………..……25
Research Design & Survey Methods…………………………………………….26
Sampling of Communities……………………………………………………….27
Program Evaluation Strategy…………………………………………………….29
Summary…………………………………………………………………………31
Chapter 4: DATA FINDINGS AND ASSESSMENT.......................................................32
Health & Hygiene Impact………………………………………………………..33
Community/Social Impact……………………………………………………….36
Educational/Vocational Impact…………………………………………………..39
Psychological Impact…………………………………………………………….42
Safety/Security Impact…………………………………………………………...45
Religious/Spiritual Impact……………………………………………………….48
Geographical and Age Differences in Responses………………………………..50
Summary…………………………………………………………………………54
iv
Chapter 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION..............................................................55
Key Findings & Implications…………………………………………………….55
Potential Bias & Limitations of Findings………………………………………..57
Contributions to Practice…………………………………………………………58
Recommendations for Future Research & Anecdotal Observations during Data
Collection………………………………………………………………………...59
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….…61
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................62
APPENDICES...............................................................................................................................69
v
LIST OF TABLES
2.1 Sources Referenced…………………………………………………………………………....8
3.1 Study Participant Demographics……………………………………………………………..29
4.1 Summary of findings………………………………………………………………………....32
4.2 How clean water has affected subject health & hygiene…………………………………….35
4.3 How clean water has affected the community and/or social interactions……………………38
4.4 How clean water has affected the subject or the family’s educational and vocational
opportunities……………………………………………………………………………………..41
4.5 How clean and accessible water has affected the subject's psyche and outlook on the
future…………………………………………………………………………………………......44
4.6 Clean and accessible water has increased my safety and security……………………..…….47
4.7 How clean water is associated with the subject’s religious/spiritual beliefs………………...50
4.8 Geographical and age-differences in responses…………………………………………..….51
4.9 Change Variables and Improvement Index by Community…………………………………53
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 Borehole Intervention Program Logic Model…………………………………………………3
4.1 Agree/Disagree: Clean water has improved my health and hygiene………………………...34
4.2 Number of times the subject gets sick from water per month.…….………………………...35
4.3 Agree/Disagree: Clean water has improved social harmony and brought the community
closer together…………………………………………………………………………………....37
4.4 Number of community events subjects attended per month…...…………………………….38
4.5 Agree/Disagree: Clean water has allowed me and/or my family more time to focus on
education…………………………………………………………………………………………40
4.6 Number of hours subjects spend on educational and/or vocational activities per month...….41
4.7 Agree/Disagree: Clean water has positively impacted my psyche and outlook on the
future……………………………………………………………………………………………..43
4.8 Number of community events subjects attended per month...……………………………….44
4.9 Agree/Disagree: Clean and accessible water has increased my safety and security…….…...46
4.10 Number of hours per month the subject’s safety and/or security was compromised……....47
4.11 Agree/Disagree: Clean and accessible water is an answer to my prayers………………….48
4.12 Number of hours per month the subject prayed for water………………………………….49
vii
ABSTRACT
Water scarcity and its associated effects are among the world’s most pressing concerns. One of
the answers to this concern has been the proliferation of clean water infrastructure in areas that
lack water infrastructure. This research study highlights the perceived effects of clean water
infrastructure on consumer wellness in Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Specifically, the study utilizes a
semi-structured survey with open-ended and closed-ended questions to establish an
understanding of consumer perceptions related to the relationship between the installation of
clean water infrastructure and its perceived wellness effects in six areas: health and hygiene,
community/social, education and/or vocation, psychological well-being, safety and security, and
religious/spiritual life. The study focuses on the perceptions of female consumers, as they are the
primary burden carriers related to water collection and familial provision. The female subjects
were interviewed in person in their respective communities to identify and understand consumer
perceptions transparently. Results of the study indicate that the installation of clean water
infrastructure has a beneficial wellness effect on consumers in each of the areas surveyed, with
the perceived beneficial effects in health and hygiene, psychological wellness, and safety and
security being the most significant. Based on the research, it can be concluded that providing
clean water infrastructure benefits consumers in multiple ways; however, when considering the
high rates of gender-based violence in the country, improvements in wellness related to safety
and security may be the most critical of the findings.
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Access to clean, affordable, and safe drinking water is widely considered a fundamental
human right and goal of the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals (Holtz & Golubski,
2021). Yet according to UNICEF (2022), 418 million people in Africa lack even a basic level of
drinking water service; 60 million reside in Nigeria (The World Bank, 2021). According to a
2019 report released by Nigeria's Federal Ministry of Water Resources and UNICEF, one-third
of the country drinks contaminated water (UNICEF, 2019).
This study analyzes the consumer-perceived health, hygiene, social, vocational,
psychological, security, and spiritual effects of developing and installing clean water boreholes
in various Nasarawa State, Nigeria communities. Roughly the geographic size of the state of
Massachusetts and with a population similar to that of the state of New Mexico, Nasarawa State
is centrally located in the middle belt region of Nigeria and shares a border with Kaduna State in
the North, Plateau State in the East, Taraba, and Benue states in the South and Kogi and the
Federal Capital Territory in the West; the state consists of 13 Local Government Areas
(Nasarawa State Government, n.d.). With an estimated population of 2.5 million people
(National Population Commission and National Bureau of Statistics Estimates, 2016), high
poverty rates, and because of an influx of water infrastructure development activity over the last
five years due to the borehole intervention program initiated by Partners for Water and Chuga
and Friends Foundation in the state, this region is a prime location to assess the perceived effects
of clean water infrastructure.
2
Nasarawa is one of 36 states in Nigeria (the largest country in Africa). As of 2021,
Nigeria's population was 213,401,323 (Nigeria has the seventh largest population in the world
behind China, India, the U.S., Indonesia, Pakistan, and Brazil). According to a 2018 study,
Nasarawa state has high levels of illiteracy, increased dependency, and poor security, among
other poverty indices (Yaro, Polycarp, & Sule, 2018). Regarding challenges such as poverty and
insecurity, Nasarawa is relatively unremarkable compared to other states in Nigeria, as every
state in the country faces these challenges to varying degrees.
The beneficial health effects of water infrastructure development are reasonably wellresearched and understood; however, questions remain regarding the perceived impact on other
critical poverty-related factors such as vocation, education, and security. Additionally, ambiguity
about the social, psychological, and spiritual effects of providing clean water infrastructure
remains.
Contextual Background & Research Problem
People who lack basic drinking water services are left to pursue alternative methods of
finding water to use and consume. These methods include but are not limited to foraging for
water over long distances from streams and pools left from rainwater (often shared with
livestock), purchasing water from vendors, and accessing sub-surface level groundwater that
may not be safe for consumption. Women and girls usually bear the burden of domestic water
collection duties, which can be linked to “adverse effects on well-being, school attendance, and a
higher risk of gender-based violence” (The World Bank, 2021); this further exacerbates already
existing gender inequities in the country (Ewang, 2022).
3
Research Purpose and Question
This research study provides insight into the perceived effects of installing
freshwater infrastructure in rural communities in Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Precisely, the study
answers the following question: What perceived impact does clean water infrastructure installed
in Nasarawa state, Nigeria, through the Partnership of Partners for Water and Chuga and Friends
Foundation have on consumer health, hygiene, social, vocational, educational, psychological,
security, and spiritual wellness? The study results and conclusions also serve as a program
evaluation of the borehole intervention program initiated and funded by Partners For Water, a
U.S.-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization and managed by Chuga and Friends Foundation, a
Nigerian NGO (Non-governmental Organization).
The water borehole intervention program began in 2018 and aims to improve health,
education opportunities, and social structures in the communities where clean water
infrastructure projects are facilitated; the borehole intervention program has reached 41
communities to date. The program follows the logic model provided below:
Inputs
Resources, Staff,
Volunteers,Time,
Economic
Investment,
Equipment
Activities
Communty
Selection,
Geological
Surveying,
Borehole Drilling
and Construction,
Operational
Management
Outputs
Boreholes
Short-term
outcomes
Improved Health
and Safety,
Improved
Educational
Opportunities,
Improved Social
Structure
Long Term
Outcomes
WASH culture
progression,
Economic and
Social
Stimulation and
Progression
4
Figure 1.1 Borehole Intervention Program Logic Model
As identified in Figure 1.1 above, the ultimate desired outcome of the program is to advance
WASH (Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene) culture while stimulating economic and social
progression.
Following the management principle that what is not measured cannot be effectively
managed, the results and conclusions of this study not only serve as a summative program
evaluation of the outputs and outcomes of the logic model but also provide critical data that may
be used to stimulate continual learning and improvement of the organization’s practices.
As is the case in much of the developing world, because of the propensity to task them
with water collection duties, women often bear the most significant burden related to water
scarcity; questions about the effects of providing clean water infrastructure were posed to this
population. Considering that the female population carries the primary burden of water collection
activities, it can be assumed that the effect on them will be more significant than on men (hence
the reason the survey is directed toward women) and that the influence on wellness for this
population will be considerable in areas including and beyond physical health.
Because the social, vocational, educational, psychological, security, and spiritual impacts
of providing clean water are not widely understood, this exploratory study is an essential
foundation for future research. As discussed in Chapter Five, additional research should be
conducted to understand better the perceived effects of clean water infrastructure and factors
affecting clean water uptake. These factors may include further expounding upon the elements
discussed in the study or may be distinct from the factors explored in the study.
Research Hypothesis
The beneficial health effects of clean water are well researched and documented; before
the study’s data collection and analysis, it was assumed that subject responses related to health
5
and hygiene impact would confirm prior research related to health benefits. Regarding the
remaining five assessment areas, the research hypothesis assumed perceived beneficial effects in
these areas; however, the exact scope and amount of these effects remained a question. Chapters
Four and Five of the dissertation provide insight into these questions.
Research Scope and Limitations
This study's scope is limited to the actual and perceived effects of potable water
availability and use among the women surveyed in 18 communities in Nasarawa State, Nigeria.
The study is also limited to evaluating the perceived impacts of the clean borehole water
installed by Partners for Water and Chuga and Friends Foundation; therefore, it may not apply to
other water access infrastructure or organizations supporting clean water development. While the
study’s results may serve as a compelling social studies research foundation, the identified
impacts do not conclusively assert that the same effects will or have been experienced across the
country of Nigeria, the continent of Africa, or anywhere else in the world.
Research Significance
The health benefits of clean water infrastructure in Nigeria and beyond are wellresearched and documented, yet the perceived collateral effects are not. This research will yield
meaningful results that will allow interested parties and stakeholders to begin to understand the
impacts, beyond physical health, of clean water infrastructure in Nasarawa, Nigeria. The results
will speak only to the perceptions of the women surveyed in Nasarawa State, Nigeria; these
results will serve as an integral component of available literature regarding the impact of the
provision of clean water infrastructure.
Definition of Key Terms
6
Basic/improved drinking water service: an improved source of drinking water beyond those
provided by the “undisturbed” environment.
Borehole: deep, narrow hole drilled into the earth's surface to locate, access, and retrieve water.
Consumer: an individual that regularly consumes water from a borehole local to their
community.
Ground Water Supply: the amount of water present beneath the earth's surface at a borehole's
inlet point
Human Development Index (HDI): a summary measure of average achievement in key
dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable, and
having a decent standard of living.
Non-governmental Organization (NGO): a voluntary group or institution with a social mission
operating independently from the government.
Potable Water: water that is safe to drink.
Sub-Saharan Africa: the area and regions of the continent of Africa that lies south of the Saharan
desert.
Sustainable Development Goal 6: The United Nation's Sustainable Development goal to ensure
the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all by 2030
(United Nations, n.d.).
United Nations (UN): an international organization comprising 193 Member States.
UNICEF: United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund
United Nations World Water Development Report: The UN-Water's flagship report on water and
sanitation issues.
Vocation: a person's employment or main occupation
7
WASH: Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene
Water Infrastructure: A system that supplies and stores potable water
Water Stressed/Scarce: lack of fresh sufficient water resources to meet the standard water
demand.
Wellness: the optimization of physical, mental, and emotional well-being
WHO: World Health Organization
World Bank: One of the world's largest sources of funding and knowledge for developing
countries.
501(c)(3) nonprofit organization: An organization that is organized and operates exclusively for
religious, charitable, scientific, or hospital purposes.
Summary
This research study provides critical insight into the effects of clean water infrastructure
in Nasarawa State, Nigeria, and evaluates the performance of the borehole intervention program
in the communities surveyed. This introductory chapter has provided a basis for the need for this
research by introducing the contextual background, establishing the research problem, purpose,
and question, and expounding on the significance of the study. The remaining chapters will
provide a comprehensive and detailed literature review that offers essential insights into existing
literature surrounding the development and provision of clean water infrastructure and its
associated effects, a thorough review of the study's methodology, results and recommendations
for future studies, and an explanation of how the research study and program will contribute to
the practice.
8
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Goal, Scope, and Methodology
This literature review collects, assesses, and synthesizes relevant literature relevant to the
study into a cohesive summary. Specifically, the literature review provides a review of:
• The Demographics of Nigeria
• Water scarcity in Nigeria
• Water Quality and the Health Benefits of Clean Water
• The Perceived Effects of Water Infrastructure Development
• The Dimensions of Wellness
• NGO Program Evaluation Constructs
• Learning Organizations & Improvement Planning
The review primarily comprised empirical research in peer-reviewed journal articles;
however, reports and documents from government agencies, non-government organizations, and
research institutions were also included. Works included in the review were chosen after an
exhaustive study of works retrieved from literary research and reference mining from select
journal articles and government and non-governmental agencies. The following table provides
the specific sources accessed during this literature review.
Peer-Reviewed Journals Government/NGO Reports & Research
Institutes
Agricultural Water Management The British Geological Survey
African Scientific Journal The Brookings Institute
Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social
Economy Research
The Government of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria
Desalination The United Nations
Environmental Health Insights The United Nations Children's Fund
Evaluation and Program Planning The United Nations Department of Economic
and Social Affairs
European Journal of Social Science Studies The United Nations Development Programme
9
Gender & Development
The United Nations Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
(OCHA)
Global Public Health The United Nations Population Division
Hydrogeology Journal The United Nations Educational, Scientific,
and Cultural Organization
International Social Work The United States Centers for Disease Control
International Development The United States Environmental Protection
Agency
International Journal of Nutrition,
Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases The World Bank
International Journal of System Dynamics
Application The World Economic Forum
Journal of Environmental Psychology The World Health Organization
Journal of Holistic Nursing
Journal of Social Science & Medicine
Journal of Management Consulting
Oxford Open Infrastructure and Health
Peace and Freedom
PLoS ONE
Science of the Total Environment
Sriwijaya Journal of Environment
Sustainability
The Journal of Development Studies
The Learning Organization
The Pan African Medical Journal
Water
Water International
World Development
Table 2.1 Sources Referenced
Demographics of Nigeria
Despite international efforts to the contrary, Nigeria remains a very slow developing
country; because of this, many of its citizens live below the International and Nigerian national
poverty line. According to a recent report from the World Bank, "sluggish growth, low human
capital, and labor market weaknesses" have led to as many as 4 in 10 Nigerians living below the
national poverty line (The World Bank, 2022). A compelling contribution to so many living
under the poverty line in Nigeria is the very young population; 43% of Nigeria’s population is
10
under the age of 14 (United Nations Population Division, 2022), thus drastically limiting the
economic earning capacity of a large part of society in Nigeria.
Life expectancy at birth in Nigeria is 54 years (United Nations Population Division,
2022); for comparison, life expectancy in the United States is 76.1 years (U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022). Nigeria's
Human Development Index (HDI) score, which summarizes average achievement in key
dimensions of human development, is .535, which ranks 163 out of 191 countries worldwide
(United Nations Development Programme, 2022).
The indicators used to measure the dimensions of HDI include life expectancy, volume
and quality of education, and the per capita gross national income. Nigeria’s relatively low HDI
ranking explains the country's citizens' comparatively low life expectancy (compared to more
developed countries such as the United States). The low HDI score can also correlate with other
factors such as unstable social infrastructure, income variability and inadequacies, and high
prevalence of diseases (including waterborne diseases). While primary school attendance has
risen from 61% in 2016 to 68% in 2021, education rates remain low in Nigeria. Lack of gender
parity in education is also a concern (UNICEF Nigeria, 2023).
In addition to Nigeria’s relatively low HDI score compared to other countries, Nigeria
currently ranks among the world's five worst performers in terms of the proportion of its
population that can access safe water supply, sanitation services, and hygiene. Because of these
shortcomings, Nigeria's federal government has issued a state of emergency in the WASH
(Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene) sector; despite this issuance, less than a third of Nigeria's states
have followed suit in treating this as a state of emergency (Government of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria, 2020).
11
Nigeria also has a relatively low Human Capital Index, which measures the amount of
human capital a child born today can expect to attain by 18. A child born in Nigeria today will be
36% as productive when she grows up as she could be if she enjoyed complete education and
total health. This outcome is lower than the average for Sub-Saharan Africa region and lowermiddle-income countries (The World Bank, 2020).
Even though the Nigerian constitution does not endorse a state-mandated official religion,
most Nigerians have made religion a considerable part of their lives, with roughly half of the
population identifying as Muslim and the other half as Christian (approximately two percent
belonging to other or no religious groups; many individuals syncretize indigenous animism with
Islam or Christianity) (U.S. Department of State, 2022). The heavy focus on religion within the
country has resulted in a largely socially conservative and religious society that finds religious or
spiritual meaning and interpretations in most things, including access or lack of access to safe
and secure water. Considering the effect of religion in Nigerian society, a study assessing social
impacts should consider religious and spiritual effects on stakeholders and their relationship with
overall wellness.
In summary, citizens of Nigerian society face many challenges; these include but are not
limited to those captured in the preceding. When assessing the wellness effects of clean water
infrastructure, researchers must understand that Nigerian stakeholders commonly encounter and
navigate life challenges different from those experienced in countries with more developed
economies and infrastructure.
Water Scarcity in Nigeria
Globally, 2 billion people do not have safe drinking water (UNESCO, 2023), and twothirds of the world population faces water-stressed conditions (United Nations, 2016). A recent
12
report from the United Nations (2022) asserted that the world's population is expected to increase
by nearly 2 billion persons in the next 30 years and could peak at around 10.4 billion in the mid2080s. Water scarcity and its associated effects are a substantial future concern for the earth's
population. Water scarcity is a global concern, particularly in Africa, where one in three people
in sub-Saharan Africa lack access to basic drinking water services (Holtz & Golubski, 2021).
A primary reason that water scarcity challenges are amplified in Africa is due to the
continent's significant population growth, where more than half of global population growth
between now and 2050 is expected to occur (United Nations Department of Economic and Social
Affairs, Population Division, 2022). Nigeria is growing the fastest and is projected to surpass the
United States in population size and become the third-largest country in the world shortly before
2050 (United Nations Department of Public Information, 2022).
“Water scarcity challenges are exacerbated by rapid population growth and additional
difficulties related to widespread poverty, inequitable access to water, climate change, and a
generally low capacity to develop and manage adequate water infrastructure” (Filho et al., 2022).
To add to this grim outlook, of the estimated 60 million Nigerians who live without access to
basic drinking water, women and girls suffer disproportionately as they are primarily responsible
for searching for and collecting water this hs been associated with a plethora of detrimental
effects including but not limited to negatively affecting school attendance and placing then at a
higher risk of violence (The World Bank, 2021).
In response to the water crisis, the proliferation of groundwater boreholes and wells has
become widely used to bring water to communities (Tökpö & Siné, 2021; MacDonald & Davies,
2000). The rationale for the widespread development of borehole wells is borehole development
is the most affordable and sustainable way of improving access to drinking water (MacDonald &
13
Calow, 2009). One of the most critical questions regarding borehole proliferation is related to the
quality of the water produced from boreholes. According to the British Geological Survey
(2000), groundwater in sub-Saharan Africa has excellent natural microbiological quality and is
generally adequate for most uses, including human consumption.
In Nigeria, where a large part of the rural population still uses easily contaminated
surface water (ponds, lakes, and rivers) for their water uses, 48% of the population is estimated
to rely on groundwater for their water needs (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for
Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene, 2023). Regional water supply and use differences are
stark in Nigeria, where urban centers are often more improved than rural ones. Even with these
differences, where individuals in urban environments typically have access to better-improved
water services than the rural population, the options for access to clean and safe water are far
from ideal.
Access to safe water is considered a fundamental human right and a public trust in some
parts of the world (Barlow & Grant, 2021). According to a 2023 report by the Joint Monitoring
Programme for Water Supply, Sanitation, and Hygiene, Nigeria is not one of those parts of the
world. In all regions of the country, less than a third of the population is supplied with safely
managed water services, and only slightly more than half are offered basic services
(WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene, 2023).
A 2020 report from UNICEF asserted that, amongst other water and sanitation challenges, the
amount and quality of water for individual use in Nigeria is lower than the required standard
(UNICEF, 2020). The amount of available quality water throughout most of the country is
seriously lacking; this includes Nasarawa state, where the per capita share in the entire state is
below established standards.
14
While the entire population is affected by water scarcity, women and girls carry the brunt
of the burden of finding and collecting water. A 2016 study that assessed the gender differences
in water collection labor across 24 Sub-Saharan countries found that among households spending
more than 30 minutes collecting water, adult females were the primary collectors of water and
that female children were more likely to be responsible for water collection than male children
(Graham, Hirai, & Kim, 2016).
The phenomenon of women and girls bearing the brunt of the crisis is no different in
Nigeria, where women and girls bear the burden of water collection undertakings (The World
Bank, 2021). While women assume the primary responsibility of water collection, they are
generally unable to influence decision-making on water development undertakings as they are
often excluded from participating in water supply development planning and the associated
economic opportunities (Acey, 2010).
As discussed, gender inequality is significant in Nigeria; the country is ranked 123rd of
146 countries on the 2022 global gender gap index. The report benchmarks the current state and
evolution of gender parity across major dimensions of economic participation and opportunity,
educational attainment, health and survival, political empowerment, and several other categories
(World Economic Forum, 2022).
Water scarcity in Nigeria is not a new concept; a 2021 study using Nigeria as a case
analyzed historical water infrastructure development in the country with a focus on the following
seven themes:
1. infrastructure divisions
2. deprioritizing water supply
3. political infrastructures
15
4. infrastructure failure and sustainability
5. infrastructure classification and typologies
6. optimal use of water resources and infrastructure
7. the future of water infrastructure development.
The study concluded that inadequate attention to, and unequal treatment of, rural water supply in
the development discourse is apparent and negatively affects livelihoods and that a lack of
intentional design and poor conceptualization forces rural populations to bear the brunt of
delayed, deteriorated, and failed water infrastructure (Adeniran, Daniell, & Pittock, 2021).
The article also highlighted that challenges related to water scarcity have been
perpetuated over many years. As with most things, a shortcoming that has manifested over many
years will likely take many years to rectify. Despite historic flaws related to potable water
infrastructure development, recent NGO water development programs have resulted in water
scarcity improvements and opportunities for improvement in overall wellness.
Water Quality and the Health Benefits of Clean Water
While water scarcity is a significant concern, the availability of clean water is an even
more substantial concern. The quality of surface level and shallow urban groundwater resources
is often inferior due to inadequate waste management and source protection at more superficial
levels, allowing for contamination; in contrast, as aforementioned, deeper borehole sources
usually provide good-quality drinking water (Lapworth et al., 2017). Typically, three types of
boreholes exist these are: manually dug boreholes (access only shallow water), manually drilled
boreholes (mostly shallow wells that are usually less than 20 meters), and motorized drilling (for
accessing the deeper saturated zone) (Villholth, 2013). While groundwater is preferred to be
accessed from the deeper saturated zone, this is not always the case. As a basic rule, the
16
shallower the groundwater is, the more vulnerable it is to contamination (Nayebare, Owor,
Kulabako, & Taylor, 2021).
A substantial amount of study and observation has confirmed the adverse effects
of drinking contaminated water; these include transmission of diseases such as cholera, diarrhea,
dysentery, hepatitis A, typhoid, and polio (World Health Organization, 2021). Diarrhea is one of
the most widely experienced effects of contaminated water consumption. Diarrheal diseases
caused by contaminated water remain a significant global health concern throughout the
developing world (Workman, 2019) and are a leading killer of children, accounting for
approximately 9 percent of all deaths among children under age five worldwide (UNICEF,
2022).
In Nigeria, the diarrhea prevalence rate is 18.8%, one of the worst in sub-Saharan Africa
and above the average of 16% (Okafor, Akinyemi, Wika-Kobani, Olubodunl, & Eze, 2022).
Childhood diarrhea is prevalent in Nigeria. A recent study (Bolarinwa, Tessema, & Ahinkorah,
2021) that aimed to examine the spatial distribution and predictors of diarrhea among under-5
children in Nigeria found that the predicted prevalence of childhood diarrhea ranged as high as
25% to 34% in parts of the country, the expected prevalence of childhood diarrhea in Nasarawa
state ranged between 3.9% and 13%. Diarrheal disease is a primary contributor to Nigeria's high
under-5 mortality rate, ranked the eighth highest globally (Bolarinwa, Tessema, & Ahinkorah,
2021). According to the WHO (2017), a significant proportion of diarrheal disease can be
prevented through safe drinking water and adequate sanitation and hygiene. A recent study
concluded that cultural/religious beliefs and lack of funds are significant barriers to diarrheal
disease prevention and asserted that education and social engagement may mitigate disease
prevalence (Odo, Onalu, Ebimgbo, Nwafor, & Ebimgbo, 2021).
17
Beyond diarrhea, The World Health Organization (2022) estimates that waterborne
diseases cause 485,000 deaths yearly. According to the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (2023), these include other gastrointestinal ailments, nervous system or reproductive
effects, and chronic diseases like cancer. Acute conditions such as cholera, diarrhea, dysentery,
hepatitis A, typhoid, and polio have also been linked to the consumption of unclean water
(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022).
The preceding suggests that consuming clean water goes a long way in disease
prevention and that when it comes to deeply drilled boreholes accessing groundwater, the purest
water is found in deeper-drilled boreholes. The remaining portion of this review will assess other
collateral effects and stakeholder analysis.
Perceived Effects of Water Infrastructure Development
Assessing the perceived impact of clean water infrastructure on consumer health,
hygiene, social, vocational, educational, psychological, security, and spiritual wellness is not an
entirely novel undertaking; however, the historical focus of assessment has been geared more
toward assessing the health and economic impacts of infrastructure development. Since the
1990s, many economists, researchers, and academics have correlated infrastructure development
with social welfare and enterprise improvements. Specifically, factors such as unspecified
benefits to households, benefits to enterprises, enlarged, improved welfare, lower cost, and
enhanced economic growth have all been attributed to infrastructure development (Prud’homme,
2004).
In the same way that available literature related to the specific nature of social benefits of
infrastructure development is somewhat lacking, available literature about consumer effects of
providing clean water beyond physical health is also light; however, the foundation of the
18
literature is not entirely void. Particularly relevant to this study is a recent study that found that
the gendered effects of physical and social infrastructure development can improve gender
equality and women's empowerment (Small & Rodgers, 2023) as infrastructure development
allows for more significant opportunities, opportunities women can capitalize on indicating that
the lives of women improve with water infrastructure development.
A 2016 article in the International Journal of System Dynamics Applications explored
how infrastructure development acts as a catalyst for socio-economic advancement and
advocates for a systems approach to infrastructure development to ensure a higher bearing on
socio-economic outcomes (Baporikar, 2016). The study concluded that infrastructure
development can act as a catalyst for social and economic growth; this conclusion is promising
for infrastructure progress in the developing world and speaks to the importance of infrastructure
development in human social progression.
Specific to water development, a 2009 article published in the Journal of Agricultural
Water Management argues that investment in water infrastructure effectively reduces poverty in
Sub-Saharan Africa (Hanjra, Ferede, & Gutta, 2009). A more recent article written in 2022
presents a socio-economic case study for rural infrastructure development in Africa and asserts
that access to clean and safe drinking water is an essential factor for local socio-economic
development (Falk, Globisch, Angelmahr, Schade, & Schenk-Mathes, 2022); however, the
article is void of specific insights of how access to clean and safe drinking water enables socioeconomic development. Similarly, a 2022 study of community-based safe water infrastructure
development in Nepal found that community-based participation can foster psychological
ownership and support the successful management of shared resources (Ambuehl, Kunwar,
19
Schertenleib, Marks, & Inauen, 2022) but does not explain how psychological ownership is
fostered because of water infrastructure development undertakings.
Regarding the psychological effects of access to improved water services, a study
published in 2021 concluded that consumers often experience emotional and psychological stress
and experience economic difficulties due to not having access to clean water (Kusumawaty &
Siswanto, 2021). Concerning water use-related behavior, a 2019 study in the Journal of Social
Science & Medicine found that the majority of water use behavior in Nigeria was governed not
by an immediate desire to maximize health but by long-established customs “embedded in the
social, technical, and physical environment and asserted that new routines that facilitate hygienic
practices, disrupt gender role traditions, and promote new norms should be established” (Curtis
et al., 2019).
Finally, a fascinating finding that came out of a 2017 study that assessed the distribution
of benefits within communities that received access to improved water services in Mozambique
was that existing social divisions related to income and political affiliation were reinforced as a
result of the introduction of improved water infrastructure; this was due to sub-national
inequalities and local processes of exclusion (Houweling, Ralph Hall, & Vance, 2017). Although
some may assume that improved infrastructure brings stakeholders together and improves
community connections, this study effectively highlights instances where this does not happen.
Such a finding starkly contrasts most available literature that identifies only the positive social
effects of introducing improved water infrastructure and highlights the critical point that
infrastructure improvements may not always lead to social benefits and may lead to detrimental
social effects.
20
Based on the preceding, it isn't easy to deduce what perceived impact clean water
infrastructure has on consumers' social, vocational, educational, psychological, security, and
spiritual wellness. A targeted analysis that seeks to comprehensively understand these effects and
probes each of these areas is warranted.
Dimensions of Wellness
Defining what exactly constitutes wellness can be challenging. A 2020 article published
in the European Journal of Social Science Studies that assessed various wellness dimension
models concluded that six dimensions are most emphasized, these are: Social Wellness, Spiritual
Wellness, Physical Wellness, Emotional Wellness, Intellectual Wellness, and Occupational
Wellness (Wickramarathne, Phuoc, & Albattat, 2020). These six dimensions serve as common
foundations of wellness improvement programs.
A 2012 study concluded that wellness in one or more of the six dimensions may protect
cognition in aging (Strout & Howard, 2012). Additionally, a recent study designed to investigate
perceptions of wellness in these six areas among women residing in the United Arab Emirates
(UAE) concluded that wellness is of great importance to the study’s subjects and that wellness is
influenced by outside factors such as age, marital status, and accommodation (Awar, et al.,
2022). Infrastructure is fundamental and profound for our health and well-being (Harris &
Leeuw, 2023); thus, water development should affect wellness. A research study to assess
wellness perceptions should consider the six dimensions while customizing the sampling to be
location and culture appropriate.
NGO Program Evaluation Constructs & Learning
International organizations increasingly value program evaluations to inform practices
and policies (D’Ostie-Racine, Dagenais, & Ridde, 2013). Program evaluation is also critical for
21
continuous improvement identification and implementation. Though it is widely understood that
program evaluation and continuous improvement are crucial factors in NGO program
improvement, recent developments have important implications for understanding the impact of
social change programming. In international development, evaluation methods should be “more
grounded in the realities of practice than some ‘results-based’ methods commonly used, and a
greater use of anthropological methods in non-governmental organization (NGO) programmed
evaluation” should be implemented (Bell & Aggleton, 2012).
In addition to the assertion that NGO program evaluation should be more grounded in the
realities of practice, a 2013 study concluded that there are three common challenges of NGO
program evaluation undertakings, these are:
Evaluation and assessment are largely descriptive and lack more sophisticated analyses;
efforts to conduct evaluation and assessment are often consolidated within organizations’
head offices, while staff members and volunteers are largely excluded; and evaluation
and assessment remain rooted in the paradigm of quantifiable results, which do not truly
reflect the nature of work being conducted on the ground. (Yu & McLaughlin, 2013)
In support of the concept that program evaluation should involve field-level practitioners,
a 2012 study asserted that rigorous qualitative research using ethnographic principles prepares
practitioners to strengthen program delivery (Bell & Aggleton, 2012). Considering the nature of
many international NGO undertakings, involving practitioners in evaluation exercises is
expected to produce the most valuable results, as field-level practitioners are more likely to
possess an intimate understanding of important practicalities related to the program under
evaluation.
22
For program evaluations to be effective, outcomes must be learned from, and identified
shortcomings must be mitigated. Organizations must be open to and accepting of continuous
learning and improvement to accomplish this effectively. These organizations, known as learning
organizations, shun the traditional, mechanistic organizational paradigm and instead adapt to a
new paradigm as necessary through constant learning and transformation following that learning
(Shelton & Darling, 2003). Peter Senge defines a learning organization as “ones that continually
expand their capacity to create their future. They are proactive, in the largest sense of that word,
not just reactive” (Kampmeier, 1996).
“There is a growing understanding that the dimensions of a learning organization
encompass some fundamental elements of leadership, strategy, participative policymaking,
continuous learning, dialogue and inquiry, team learning, empowerment, and facilitating
processes and structure” (Leufvén, Vitrakoti, Bergström, KC, & Målqvist, 2015). Organizations
seeking to remain on the cutting edge of social impact and program effectiveness should adhere
to these essential elements. Failure to adhere to these crucial elements will likely impede
organizational learning and growth. Considering this, NGOs must seek to implement findings
related to this study and adhere to the abovementioned principles.
Summary of Key Literature
Rapid population growth in Nigeria exacerbates challenges related to water scarcity and
access to safe water. Many citizens of Nigeria live under disadvantaged conditions concerning
critical items such as access to education, critical infrastructure, and economic capital; the
forecasted rapid population growth will likely exacerbate these detrimental conditions, thus
worsening already dismal conditions. Program evaluation and learning implementation are
23
critical elements of continual improvement; failure to understanding from and implement these
learnings will inhibit NGO program success.
While the existing literature shows that infrastructure development improves gender
equality, socio-economic standing, and psychological well-being, the existing literature base
lacks quantitative data providing essential details on how these factors are improved and can be
further stimulated. One article concluded that introducing improved water services may enhance
existing social divisions.
Gaps in the Existing Literature
Despite there being a robust amount of peer-reviewed literature and government reports
regarding water supply and use in Nigeria and the health effects of consuming clean water, there
is a shortage of published literature on the perceived social impacts of providing clean water in
Sub-Saharan Africa primarily related to consumer social, vocational, educational, psychological,
security, and spiritual wellness effects. Though some research has been published on the social
implications of infrastructure development, the existing literature lacks in-depth qualitative
analysis. Existing literature is also void of quantitative inputs, making it difficult to understand
the exact nature and significance of the impact.
Conclusion
Opportunities for expanding the existing literature base to include literature related to the
perceived effects of introducing access to and using improved water services on consumers'
social, vocational, educational, psychological, security, and spiritual wellness are apparent.
These opportunities should be capitalized on to provide philanthropic, government, nongovernment, and international development organizations with applicable and relevant data as
24
they continue to fight against safe water scarcity. These organizations will likely improve
program delivery upon implementing the findings from the development of new data.
25
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
The methodology used to assess the perceived impact of clean water infrastructure must
be structured to evaluate trends while allowing for qualitative inputs. This study used a mixed
methods approach that investigates consumers' perceptions; such a research approach is ideal as
these topics have yet to be studied in depth (George, 2023). While exploratory research is often
qualitative as it focuses on the "why" rather than the "what" of social phenomena and relies on
the direct experiences of human beings as meaning-making agents in their everyday lives
(University of Texas Austin Libraries, 2023), this study will also include quantitative analysis.
This mixed research method is preferred to find reasonable and sound answers to understand
human behavior (Saklind, 2009) and to assess impact.
Philosophical Assumptions and Researcher Bias
In discussing research approaches and philosophical assumptions, Creswell (2014)
identified four basic worldviews that lead to various research approaches: (1) the post-positivism
worldview, which typically leads to quantitative research; (2) the constructivism worldview,
which typically leads to qualitative research; (3) the transformative worldview, which typically
leads to qualitative research; and (4) the pragmatic worldview, which typically leads to mixed
methods research (pp. 5-11). Many social science scholars have opined that pragmatism
effectively creates knowledge (Kaushik & Walsh, 2019); because of this research study employs
a mixed methods research approach focusing on a pragmatic worldview that seeks to understand
practical social developments related to clean water infrastructure development in Nasarawa
state Nigeria.
Though the pragmatic worldview and associated mixed methods research approach is the
most appropriate for this study, such a research approach is not without bias as a pragmatic
26
worldview and research methodology can lead to subjective conclusions. Also, regarding bias, as
an international development and clean water infrastructure advocate who leads a United Statesbased 501c3 organization facilitating water development projects in Nasarawa state, I am biased
toward the assumption that the provision of clean water yields only beneficial results. Finally, the
study acts as a program evaluation for the borehole intervention program initiated by Chuga and
Friends Foundation and Partners For Water, which may further introduce subjectivity to the
study’s methodology and conclusions.
Research Design & Survey Methods
The most effective way to understand someone’s perception of something is to ask them;
this is precisely the strategy of this research design. This strategy aims to draw inferences about
the effects of water infrastructure by surveying people from communities that received clean
water projects and asking them to reflect on changes clean water has brought. This methodology
aims to get to the root of the perceived effect of providing clean water infrastructure.
To accomplish this, a semi-structured survey with open-ended and closed-ended
questions was used to establish an understanding of consumer perceptions; this hybrid survey
approach was used to measure the feelings and attitudes of the study participants and to assess
why each subject feels the way they do.
Subjects were surveyed on six primary topics through a semi-structured interview that
took place in their community; the interview protocol can be found in Appendix 1. The primary
topics that were assessed are as follows:
1. Health & Hygiene Impact
2. Community/Social Impact
3. Educational/Vocational Impact
27
4. Psychological Impact
5. Safety/Security Impact
6. Religious/Spiritual Impact
Sampling of Communities
Over the past six years (2018-2024), the Chuga and Friends Foundation (CFF) has
overseen and managed 41 deeply drilled encased water borehole community projects in
Nasarawa State, Nigeria. From this population of communities, in January 2024, 18 communities
were sampled. All sampled communities included appropriately recent projects, that is, projects
that are not too distant in the past, such that people would not recall the prior conditions
accurately but not so recent that changes would not have yet materialized. Thus, to qualify for
study participation, communities selected for this study were those whose water service
improvements occurred more than a year ago but less than three years ago.
Human Subject Considerations
Before engaging in data collection activities, the team received training on appropriate
human-subject interactions, research design methodology, and study objectives. To effectively
introduce the survey, explain its purpose, explain who is conducting it and why, and confirm
consent to participate, the data collection team followed the script provided in Appendix 2. IRB
exempt status was sought and approved for this study. A copy of the IRB exemption letter is
included in Appendix 3.
Recruitment of Interview Participants
Because women bear the primary burden of water collection activities in Nigeria, women
above 18 comprise the study's target population. Women from 18 distinct communities comprise
the study sample; in total, 175 women gave interviews for the study. To garner interest in the
28
study participation, our research team asked the village/community head to assemble as many
water-collecting women as possible so that the research team could introduce the study. Because
many subjects had limited reading and writing capabilities, informed consent and the interview
content were verbally explained to this group.
Subjects were also informed that the study would broaden the base of understanding
related to the social effect of clean water infrastructure development and would play an essential
role in the progression of infrastructure development (primarily associated with water, sanitation,
and hygiene) in their region. No incentives were promised to induce participation in the study.
Community members in Nasarawa state tend to be very communal and, thus, were generally
willing to participate in the study; that said, many potential subjects chose not to participate.
Reasons for not participating included, but were not limited to, not garnering permission
from their husbands to participate, not having an opinion on the interview subject matter, and
simply not wanting to participate. Additionally, some initially consented to the study but
declined to participate after initially consenting. On average, 23 women per community were
solicited to be interviewed for the study, and approximately 10 per community chose to
participate.
Study Participant Demographics
The study’s subjects varied widely in age, ranging from 18 – 70; however, only 29
participants were over 50, with the average age of the study participants being 37.3 years old.
The average time of each participant living in the respective community was 22.1 years. Table
3.1 below provides details into the age, tenure, and number of subject demographics per
community involved in the study.
29
Table 3.1 Study Participant Demographics
Program Evaluation Strategy
In an atypical approach to NGO program evaluation, this evaluation focuses entirely on
the consumer experience through interviews conducted within each community at the grassroots
level. Because of the importance of practitioner involvement in program evaluation, the same
personnel involved in implementing and managing the borehole intervention program conducted
Community
Date of
Borehole
Installation
Number of
Interviews
Conducted
(n=175)
Age
Range of
Interview
Subjects
Average
age of
Interview
Subjects
(in years)
Average time living in
the Community (in
years)
Washo Nov 2022 10 19-52 34.4 24.5
Angwan
Manasara Nov 2022 10 23-65 39.6 19
Ngha
Gbuden May 2022 10 21-35 29.9 17.6
Kwolla May 2022 10 30-56 42.4 15.3
Yanku Mar 2022 10 30-60 41.1 24
Tudu-Uku Mar 2022 10 27-60 37.5 18.9
Angwan
Maikanzo Mar 2022 10 27-56 38.9 12.9
Janruwa
Kaduna Jan 2022 8 18-37 28.1 22.4
Chunche
Mada Jan 2022 10 30-62 41.5 20.3
Angwan
Badugu Nov 2021 10 30-65 39.7 15.2
Angwan
Madaki Sep 2021 10 29-70 43.3 29.3
Ambu Sep 2021 10 19-50 34.3 17.7
Agyaragu Aug 2021 10 28-70 38.8 21.5
Akpoakla July 2021 7 20-34 28.9 25.3
Ankolo July 2021 10 30-55 43.9 26.6
Ninkada May 2021 10 24-60 37.6 20.8
Ngha Bar May 2021 10 19-42 31.1 22.1
Angwan
Jatau Feb 2021 10 20-58 34.3 13.5
Study
Average 37.3 22.1
30
subject interviews; the interview script was effectively implemented while making important
anecdotal observations that added important content to the program evaluation. Upon completion
of the study, the study’s conclusions, anecdotal observations, and recommendations were used to
maximize continuous improvement in the program and provide additional training to the team
implementing and managing field activities related to the program.
Data Collection
To maximize cultural sensitivity and adherence to local customs, personnel from Chuga
and Friends Foundation (CFF), a Nasarawa State Nigeria-based NGO, conducted each of the
surveys live and in person in each of the communities represented in the study; the interviews
took place in a community common area (either a church, school, or community gathering place)
and typically took 20 to 25 minutes each to conduct. Relying on local cultural familiarity and
sensitivity, this team was able to probe subjects effectively with open-ended questions.
The interviews were conducted verbally because of language and literary challenges due to
variations in English language utilization and local language dialect usage, and the interviewer
noted responses. Subject responses to close-ended questions were verbatim recorded; however,
responses to open-ended questions mainly were summarized, but some responses to open-ended
questions were verbatim recorded.
Data Analysis
Upon completing interviews with each subject, the data was organized and shared with
the organization’s management team, who analyzed and compared the responses to assess the
perceived impact of clean water infrastructure on consumer health, hygiene, social, educational,
vocational, psychological, security, and religious/spiritual wellness. Specifically, after recording
the data into an Excel spreadsheet, JMPTM statistical software was used to explore and transform
31
the raw data obtained during the subject interviews into usable information where response
comparisons were made and statistical analyses were undertaken. The results of the data analysis
have been integrated to provide a comprehensive assessment (provided in Chapter 4) of the
perceived effects of the provision of clean water infrastructure on consumer health, hygiene,
social, vocational, educational, psychological, security, and spiritual wellness.
Summary
The mixed methods approach of this study effectively ascertained consumers' perception
of the impact of clean water infrastructure while providing critical data to evaluate the borehole
intervention program instituted by Partners For Water, Inc. and managed by Chuga and Friends
Foundation. The program evaluation has yielded significant findings that provide important
implications and options for continual program improvement.
32
CHAPTER 4: DATA FINDINGS AND ASSESSMENT
To effectively conduct a program evaluation of the borehole intervention program, a
thorough assessment of the perceived effects of the program must be undertaken. The assessment
methodology conducted to accomplish this is aligned with the program’s logic model and
mission. As discussed in chapters one and three, the topics assessed herein are as follows:
1. Health & Hygiene Impact
2. Community/Social Impact
3. Educational/Vocational Impact
4. Psychological Impact
5. Safety/Security Impact
6. Religious/Spiritual Impact
In summary, there was progression in each of these areas evaluated during the study; the
table below provides summarizes this progression.
Health & Hygiene
Impact
There was a reported decrease of
91.2% in the number of times
subjects get sick from consuming
water per month since a clean
water borehole was installed in
their community.
Summary Statistics
Mean Decrease: 3.1
Standard Deviation: 2.7
Standard Error: .2
Upper 95%: 3.5
Lower 95%: 2.7
Community/Social
Impact
There was a reported increase of
110.4% in the number of social
events subjects attended since
installing a clean water borehole
in their community.
Mean Increase: 5
Standard Deviation: 4.8
Standard Error: .4
Upper 95%: 5.7
Lower 95%: 4.3
Educational/Vocational
Impact
There was a reported increase of
120.2% of hours spent on
educational and/or vocational
activities since installing a clean
water borehole in their
community.
Mean Increase: 14.9
Standard Deviation: 20.4
Standard Error: 1.5
Upper 95%: 17.9
Lower 95%: 11.9
Psychological Impact There was a reported decrease of
97% in the time spent worrying
Mean Decrease: 19.7
Standard Deviation: 9.1
33
about water since installing a
clean water borehole in their
community.
Standard Error: .7
Upper 95%: 21
Lower 95%: 18.3
Safety/Security Impact
There was a reported decrease of
96.6% in the number of hours
subject safety and/or security
was compromised while looking
for and collecting water.
Mean Increase: 22.7
Standard Deviation: 11.3
Standard Error: .9
Upper 95%: 24.4
Lower 95%: 21
Religious/Spiritual
Impact
There was a reported decrease of
98.3% in the time spent praying
for water since installing a clean
water borehole in their
community.
Mean Decrease: 19.1
Standard Deviation: 9
Standard Error: .7
Upper 95%: 20.5
Lower 95%: 17.8
Table 4.1 Summary of findings
Health & Hygiene Impact
Improved health and hygiene are the driving force behind many clean water intervention
programs and one of the drivers behind the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 6
(The United Nations goal to ensure the availability and sustainable management of water and
sanitation for all). A fundamental anticipated and expected outcome of the borehole intervention
is improved health and hygiene. This outcome can be evidenced in several ways, including
directly asking subjects about their perceived effects. Querying subjects on their perceived health
& hygiene impact of installing a freshwater borehole in their community is an effective
evaluation method for summative program evaluation. To accomplish this, subjects were asked
the following questions:
1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water
being made available in my community has improved my health and hygiene.”
2. “How many times per month did you get sick from drinking or bathing in water
before a freshwater borehole was installed in your community?”
3. “How many times per month do you get sick from drinking or bathing in water now?”
34
4. “How has consuming and regularly bathing in clean water affected your health and
hygiene? Please provide one or more examples.”
The response to whether clean and accessible water being made available in their
community had improved their health and hygiene was overwhelming; 172 of the 175 surveyed
agreed that clean water being made available in their community had improved their health and
hygiene. The remaining three (3) subjects neither agreed nor disagreed with this statement. This
outcome is depicted in Figure 4.1 below:
Figure 4.1 Agree/Disagree: Clean water has improved my health and hygiene
Subjects were queried regarding the number of times per month they got sick from
drinking or bathing in water before a freshwater borehole was installed in their community and
the number of times they get sick from drinking or bathing in water now. The difference in
reported sickness frequency is stark, as the reported incidence of water-related sickness
decreased by 91.2%. The mean number of times subjects got sick per month was 3.4 times; the
mean number of times subjects got ill after a clean water borehole was installed was .3 times per
month, with most subjects reporting that they no longer get sick from water at all.
Clean and accessible water being made available in my
community has improved my health and hygiene.
Agree Neither Agree or Disagree
35
This result confirms the anticipated outcome of improved health in the program’s logic
model. It effectively signifies that the program has succeeded in its vision to bring positive
change to the health outcomes of the communities they serve. These results are depicted in
graphical form in Figure 4.2 below.
Figure 4.2 Number of times the subject gets sick from water per month
Regarding how consuming and regularly bathing in clean water affected the health and
hygiene of the subjects, variations of the following themes were provided:
Subject indicated they had experienced improved health and/or hygiene. 85
The subject indicated their skin, complexion, or hair had improved. 28
Subjects indicated they rarely get sick or go to the clinic. 26
Subject indicated their health and/or hygiene has improved, and they feel stronger. 22
The subject indicated that they feel stronger and have more energy 12
The subject did not explain how consuming and regularly bathing in clean water has
affected their health and/or hygiene. 2
Table 4.2 How clean water has affected subject health & hygiene
An exciting and somewhat surprising finding was the number of subjects who asserted
that they enjoyed and most appreciated their hair, skin, and/or appearance improvements.
Answers such as: “my hygiene has improved, and my skin is looking good”, “my hygiene is
3.4
0.3
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Before a freshwater borehole was installed in my community Now
Number of times per month subject got
sick from drinking or bathing in water
before a freshwater borehole was
installed in their community versus now.
36
better, and my skin is glowing, I am looking good,” and “my rashes are gone, and “I no longer
have skin patches in my hair” were unexpected and speak to unanticipated advantageous
perceptions. The anticipated benefits included improved health and hygiene; however, the
reports of improved appearance and self-esteem due to the provision and subsequent
consumption of clean water are serendipitous.
Community/Social Impact
A desired outcome of the borehole intervention program is an improved social structure
in the communities touched. Improvements to a community’s social structure can be assessed in
several ways, including but not limited to determining and evaluating the qualitative
improvements in relationships, measuring tangible improvements to the community's social
structure, and measuring alignment amongst community members. To assess the perceived
community/social impact of the installation of a freshwater borehole in their community,
subjects were asked the following questions:
1. Do you agree or disagree with the statement: “Clean and accessible water being made
available in my community has improved social harmony and brought the community
closer together.”
2. How many social events did you attend in your community per month before a
freshwater borehole was installed in your community?
3. How many social events do you attend per month in your community now?
4. How has clean and accessible water in your community affected your community’s
social harmony? Please provide one or more examples.
In responding to whether clean and accessible water being made available in their
community had improved social harmony and brought the community closer together, 174 of the
37
175 surveyed agreed with this statement, and one (1) neither agreed nor disagreed. The assertion
that the provision of water has made the community more harmonious was nearly unanimous.
Such a result speaks to the binding nature of community infrastructure and the propensity for
community projects to facilitate collaboration.
This finding is depicted in Figure 4.3 below:
Figure 4.3 Agree/Disagree: Clean water has improved social harmony and brought the community closer together.
When asked how many social events they attended per month before a freshwater
borehole was installed in their community versus how many social events they attend now the
results were telling. The mean number of events attended before a borehole was installed in their
community was 4.53, and the mean number of events attended now is 9.53, an increase of
110.4%, representing an average of 5 additional community events attended per month per
subject. Such an outcome speaks to increased social harmony and community closeness and
implies that more significant human resources related to time, energy and effort may be available
(because they are no longer being expended in the search water) for future community
stimulation undertakings.
Clean and accessible water being made available in my
community has improved social harmony and brought the
community closer together.
Agree Neither Agree or Disagree
38
While the increase in the number of social events being attended could have contributions
by of other factors, this result is telling. It implies that clean water infrastructure positively
affects social relationships. It may be a foundation for bolstering social initiatives such as
additional infrastructure development, community-based economic stimulation programs, and/or
community-based education undertakings. Figure 4.4 below provides a graphical representation
of this finding.
Figure 4.4 Number of community events subjects attended per month
Regarding how clean and accessible water has affected the community’s social harmony,
variations of the following themes were provided as responses:
The subject indicated that the community's peace, harmony, and/or unity have
increased. 121
The subject indicated increased interaction/visitation with other community members
and/or participation in festivities. 16
The subject indicated that community organization and/or cooperation has increased. 13
The subject indicated that involvement in community work has increased. 12
The subject indicated that familial/marital or other relationships have improved. 9
The subject indicated that communication within the community has increased. 4
Table 4.3 How clean water has affected the community and/or social interactions
4.53
9.53
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Before a freshwater borehole was installed in my community Now
Number of community events attended
prior to a clean water borehole being
installed in your community versus now.
39
A few interesting and noteworthy responses were as follows: “We now live-in peace with
each other, no more fighting for water at the stream,” “We get along better because we are
looking better and like each other more,” “We now work together to organize and coordinate
water distribution”, and “we now have specific times to collect water from the borehole”. Such
responses speak to the nature of the perceived effect of local, accessible, and clean water and
provide a vivid example of how community infrastructure undertakings can stimulate harmony in
the community.
Educational/Vocational Impact
Improved educational opportunities and economic stimulation are anticipated outcomes
in the program’s logic model both in the short and long term. Specifically, improved educational
opportunities are a short-term outcome, and economic stimulation is a long-term outcome.
Similar to health and hygiene impact, beneficial impacts on education and/or vocation are
fundamental expectations of infrastructure development. To assess the perceived
educational/vocational impact of the installation of a freshwater borehole in their community,
subjects were asked the following questions:
1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water
being made available in my community has allowed me and/or my family more time to
focus on education.”
2. How many hours did you spend on educational or vocational (employment, occupation)
activities per month before a freshwater borehole was installed in your community?
3. How many hours do you spend on educational or vocational activities per month now?
4. How has clean and accessible water in your community affected your and/or your
family’s educational and vocational opportunities? Please provide one or more examples.
40
The response to whether clean and accessible water being made available in their
community had allowed the subject or her family more time to focus on education was very
telling. 170 of the 175 surveyed agreed with this statement, and five (5) neither agreed nor
disagreed. The fact that no subjects disagreed that providing clean water had improved education
opportunities confirms the hypothesis that access to and consumption of clean water has
beneficial collateral effects beyond health and hygiene improvements.
Figure 4.5 Agree/Disagree: Clean water has allowed me and/or my family more time to focus on education.
When probed regarding how many hours each subject spent on educational or vocational
(employment, occupation) activities per month before a freshwater borehole was installed in
your community, the mean response was 12.4 hours; when asked how many hours each subject
spent on educational or vocational (employment, occupation) activities per month now, the mean
response was 27.3 hours, this outcome is detailed in Figure 4.6 below. This outcome represents
an average increase of 14.9 hours per subject and 120.2% of hours spent on educational and/or
vocational activities.
Clean and accessible water being made available in my
community has allowed me and/or my family more time to
focus on education.
Agree Neither Agree or Disagree
41
Such a remarkable increase is notable; however, it presents critical questions that the
borehole intervention program administrators should assess. Potential questions include but are
not limited to the following: Should community members receive training in time management
skills, and if so, who should provide the training? Should economic management training be
provided to community members, and who should give it? And are the educational opportunities
available to community members adequate?
Figure 4.6 Number of hours subjects spend on educational and/or vocational activities per month
Regarding how clean and accessible water in their community affected the subject or the
subject’s family’s educational and vocational opportunities, variations of the following themes
were provided as responses:
Subjects indicated that they or their family’s attendance at vocational or educational
undertakings is more punctual. 86
The subjects indicated that their family's vocational and/or educational performance
and/or opportunities had increased. 33
Subjects indicated that they and/or their children attend school and/or work more
regularly. 23
Subjects indicated they are more optimistic and/or less stressed regarding future
vocational opportunities. 19
The subject indicated that they or their family can make and/or save more money. 8
Subjects indicated that their children’s school grades have improved. 6
12.4
27.3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Before a freshwater borehole was installed in your community Now
Number of hours spent per month on
educational or vocational activities
before a freshwater borehole was
installed in your community versus now.
42
Table 4.4 How clean water has affected the subject or the family’s educational and vocational opportunities
A few noteworthy responses regarding how clean and accessible water in their
community affected the subject or the subject’s family’s educational and vocational
opportunities include the following: “We no longer struggle for water, which allows my kids to
go to school on time and for me to go to work on time”; “My business has improved, I now open
the shop regularly and on time,” and “Me and my husband now put more energy into the farm
because we are stronger and healthier.”
Psychological Impact
Improved WASH culture progression is an expected outcome in the program logic
model; an essential component of cultural progression is psychological security and impact, as a
progressive culture cannot be effectively established and sustained in an environment of
psychological uncertainty. To assess the perceived psychological effects of the installation of a
freshwater borehole in their community, subjects were asked the following questions:
1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water
being made available in my community has positively impacted my psyche and outlook
on the future.”
2. How many hours did you worry about water before a freshwater borehole was installed in
your community?
3. How many hours per month do you worry about water now?
4. How has clean and accessible water being made available in your community affected
your psyche and outlook on the future? Please provide one or more examples.
Regarding whether clean and accessible water being made available in their community
had positively impacted their psyche and outlook on the future, 168 of the 175 surveyed
agreed with this statement, one (1) disagreed, and six (6) neither agreed nor disagreed.
43
Although subject responses were not unanimous, most affirmed that providing clean water
infrastructure had a positive psychological impact, implying that installing a clean water
borehole positively impacts the consumer’s psyche. Figure 4.7 below includes a graphical
depiction of this outcome.
Figure 4.7 Agree/Disagree: Clean water has positively impacted my psyche and outlook on the future
When asked how many hours per month each subject spent worrying about water before
a freshwater borehole was installed in their community, the mean response was 20.3 hours; when
asked how many hours per month each subject spent worrying about water now, the mean
response was .61 hours with most subjects responding that they no longer worry about water.
The decrease in the number of hours spent worrying about water represents a decrease of 97%.
These survey responses indicate that providing clean water infrastructure has had a positive
psychological effect on the subjects involved in the study. Figure 4.8 below provides a graphic
insight into the transformation.
Clean and accessible water being made available in my
community has positively impacted my psyche and outlook
on the future
Agree Disagree Neither Agree or Disagree
44
Figure 4.8 Number of hours per month subjects worry about water
Regarding how clean and accessible water being made available in their community
affected their psyche and outlook on the future, variations of the following themes were provided
as responses:
Subjects indicated their confidence has improved because of their improved
health/appearance and/or enhanced economic or educational opportunities. 100
Subjects indicated that clean water improved their outlook on the future. 52
Subjects indicated feeling more confident, courageous, and/or fulfilled. 9
Subjects indicated they no longer worry about water and are less stressed. 7
Subjects did not indicate that their psyche had been affected by the provision of water. 7
Table 4.5 How clean and accessible water has affected the subject's psyche and outlook on the future
A few subject responses that stood out from the others include the following: “There are
fewer miscarriages and stillborns in the community, which has reduced stress and fear.”; “I feel
strong and confident, and ready to do anything at any time,” and “My fear and anxiety are no
more because of clean water.” Such responses indicate that stress reduction related to providing
clean water can be far-reaching and varied. It can be expected that the specific nature of the
20.3
.6
0
5
10
15
20
25
Number of hours per month spent worrying about water before a freshwater borehole was installed in your
community.
Now
Number of hours subjects spent per
month worrying about water before a
freshwater borehole was installed in their
community versus now.
45
reasons for stress reduction related to clean water will continue to evolve as time goes on and
clean water becomes more of a fundamental staple of the community.
Safety/Security Impact
Improved safety is an anticipated outcome of the program’s logic model. Evaluating
safety and security improvements (or lack thereof) is essential to the program evaluation. To
assess and evaluate the perceived safety/security impact of the installation of a freshwater
borehole in their community, subjects were asked the following questions:
1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water
being made available in my community has increased my safety and security.”
2. How many hours per month was your safety and security compromised while you were
looking for and collecting water before a freshwater borehole was installed in your
community?
3. How many hours per month is your safety and security compromised now?
4. How has clean and accessible water being made available in your community affected
your safety and security? Please provide one or more examples.
Regarding whether clean and accessible water being made available in their community
had increased their safety and security, 171 of the 175 surveyed agreed with this statement, and
four neither agreed nor disagreed. Unlike improvements in health and hygiene, improvements to
safety and/or security are not typically considered to be areas of expected immediate
improvements; however, when considering the safety and security related risk associated with
looking for and accessing water, increases in safety and security because of installing
immediately accessible water in the community make sense. Figure 4.9 below graphically
displays this result.
46
Figure 4.9 Clean and accessible water has increased my safety and security
When asked how many hours per month each subject’s safety and security were
compromised while looking for and collecting water before a freshwater borehole was installed
in their community, the mean response was 23.5 hours; when asked how many hours per month
each subject’s safety and security were compromised while looking for and collecting water
now, the mean response was .79 hours with most subjects responding that their safety and/or
security are no longer compromised because of water collection duties; a 96.6% decrease. Such a
decrease in the number of hours subjects spent with their safety and/or security being
compromised while collecting water represents a significant increase in the consumer's perceived
safety by installing a clean water borehole. This outcome affirms the logic model’s anticipated
improved safety and security outcome. Figure 4.10 below depicts this relationship and presents
an important question to consider and assess: does improved safety and security liberate
community members to pursue opportunities that otherwise may not have been available? If so,
how can community members best pursue and capitalize on the opportunities?
Clean and accessible water being made available in my
community has increased my safety and security
Agree Disagree Neither Agree or Disagree
47
Figure 4.10 Number of hours per month the subject’s safety and/or security was compromised.
Regarding how water being made available in their community has affected the safety
and security of subjects, variations of the following themes were provided as responses:
The subject indicated that they worry less about their safety/feel safer, and/or are
generally more safe and secure because they do not have to leave the community to find
water.
116
Subjects indicated they no longer fear snakes or other animal interactions while
gathering water. 30
The subject indicated that they no longer worry about being assaulted by herdsmen or
bandits when looking for and/or gathering water late at night or early in the morning. 25
Subjects indicated that they still fear for their safety. 4
Table 4.6 Clean and accessible water has increased my safety and security.
While most subjects interviewed asserted that they feel more safe and secure as a result
of no longer needing to leave their community in search of water, there were a few insightful
assertions made in response to the question, including the following: “My fear of snake bites,
animal attacks, kidnapping, and dying early are now gone because of water being brought to my
community,” “I am much safer now, I no longer have to drink after animals, and “I don’t go to
the stream any longer, I am much safer.” These and similar responses imply nuance and
unanticipated specificity beyond general improvements related to safety and security,
23.5
.8
0
5
10
15
20
25
How many hours per month was your safety and/or security compromised while looking for and collecting
water before a freshwater borehole was installed in your community?
Now
Number of hours per month the subject’s
safety and/or security was compromised
while looking for and collecting water
before a freshwater borehole versus now.
48
Religious/Spiritual Impact
Religion and spirituality are a significant part of Nigerian culture and community. An
anticipated outcome of the borehole intervention program is an improved and progressive social
structure; because of the prominence of religious/spiritual values in Nigeria, assessing the
religious/spiritual impact of providing clean water infrastructure is critical. To evaluate the
perceived religious/spiritual implications of the installation of a freshwater borehole in their
community, subjects were asked the following questions:
1. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water
being made available in my community is an answer to my prayers.”
2. How many hours per month did you spend praying for water before a freshwater borehole
was installed in your community?
3. How many hours per month do you spend praying for water now?
4. Do you associate the provision of clean and accessible water in your community with
your religious/spiritual beliefs? If so, how?
Figure 4.11 Clean and accessible water is an answer to my prayers
Clean and accessible water being made available in my
community is an answer to my prayers
Agree Disagree Neither Agree or Disagree
49
Regarding whether clean and accessible water being made available in their community
is an answer to prayer, 160 agreed with this statement, seven (7) disagreed, and eight (8) neither
agreed nor disagreed. Although most subjects asserted that water being provided in their
community was an answer to prayer, the vast majority, 106, did not correlate the provision of
water with their religious beliefs; this possibly implies that while most subjects correlate the
provision of water with prayers being answered, they do not necessarily attach the provision of
water to an established belief pattern.
When asked how many hours per month each subject spent praying for water before a
freshwater borehole was installed in their community, the mean response was 19.44 hours; when
asked how many hours per month each subject spent praying for water now, the mean response
was .33 hours; figure 4.12 below depicts this outcome. Like other perceived outcomes assessed
in the study (e.g., psychological, and safety & security impacts), the change in time spent praying
for water has decreased substantially since installing a clean water borehole. This outcome
makes sense, considering clean water has now been brought to the community.
Figure 4.12 Number of hours per month the subject prayed for water
19.4
.3
0
5
10
15
20
25
How many hours per month did you spend praying for water before a freshwater borehole was installed in
your community?
Now
Number of hours per month the subject
spent praying for water before a
freshwater borehole versus now.
50
Regarding whether they associated the provision of clean and accessible water being
provided in their community with their religious/spiritual beliefs, variations of the following
themes were provided as responses:
Subjects do not associate the provision of clean and accessible water in their
community with their religious/spiritual beliefs. 106
The subject believes that God is the source of the water or that the provision of water
is an answer to prayer.
58
Subject associates the provision of clean and accessible water in their community with
their religious/spiritual beliefs but did not elaborate on why. 11
Table 4.7 How clean water is associated with the subject’s religious/spiritual beliefs.
Although most subjects did not associate the provision of clean and accessible water in
their community with their religious/spiritual beliefs, over a third of respondents did. Several of
the responses of those who did associate the provision of water with their spiritual/religious
beliefs are as follows: “It is an expression of God's love and providence to the disadvantaged,”
“God wants our fellowship as a community to reflect the kind of fellowship he has with us so he
gave us a borehole to strengthen our relationships,” and “yes water symbolizes our community,
therefore, is rescued from death due to clean and accessible water.”
Geographical and Age Differences in Responses
The outcomes presented and discussed above provide insight and details regarding the
perceived wellness impacts addressed in chapter one of the dissertation. Table 4.8 below
provides further statistical analysis regarding the perceived wellness effects of clean water
infrastructure as expressed by the subjects surveyed. Specifically, the geographical and age
differences in responses in the table below provide insight into community and age-specific
variances in subject responses. Regarding the age difference assessment, as noted in Table 3.1,
the mean age of the study participants was 37.2; because of this, two groups, those 37 and under
51
and those 38 and older, were assessed. Regarding geographical separations, each of the 18
communities surveyed was separately evaluated.
1. The number of times the Subject got sick from water per month before a borehole was
installed in their community.
a. The number of times per month the Subject gets sick from water now.
2. The number of monthly social events attended before a borehole was installed in your
community.
a. The number of social events attended per month now.
3. The number of hours spent on educational or vocational activities per month before a
freshwater borehole was installed in your community.
a. Number of hours spent on educational or vocational activities per month now.
4. The number of hours spent per month worrying about water before a freshwater
borehole was installed in your community.
a. Number of hours per month spent worrying about water now.
5. The number of hours per month where your safety and security were compromised
while you were looking for and collecting water before a freshwater borehole was
installed in your community.
a. The number of hours per month where your safety and security were
compromised while you were looking for and collecting water now.
6. The number of hours spent per month praying for water before a freshwater borehole
was installed in your community.
a. The number of hours spent per month praying for water now.
Community N 1 1a 2 2a 3 3a 4 4a 5 5a 6 6a
Washo 10 3 .4 2.5 7.4 4.2 12.6 10.5 .2 18 1 10.4 0
Angwan
Manasara 10 7.6 .1 4.1 8.5 7.2 9.8 24.6 1 23.6 0 21.6 2.4
Ngha
Gbuden 10 5.2 1.2 5.5 9.9 7.6 17.5 16.3 1.9 20.8 2.6 16.1 .6
Kwolla 10 2.9 0 2.4 6.6 8.6 26 24 0 24 0 24 0
Yanku 10 3.2 0 3 7.6 13.1 37.5 24 0 24 0 24 0
Tudu-Uku 10 3.8 .4 2.4 5.4 4.6 11.3 23.6 0 23.6 0 23.6 0
Angwan
Maikanzo 10 2.6 0 1.9 5.4 15.1 57 24 0 24 0 24 0
Janruwa
Kaduna 8 4.4 1 4.9 9.8 7.9 13 12.8 .7 18.6 2.3 7.5 .6
Chunche
Mada 10 2.7 0 2.6 6.4 8.9 40 24 0 24 0 24 0
Angwan
Badugu 10 3 0 2.6 5.7 15 24.4 24 0 24 0 21.6 0
52
Table 4.8 Geographical and age-differences in Responses
The responses amongst older and younger subjects were similar except for perceived
psychological impact, safety/security impact, and religious/spiritual impact. Specifically, older
subjects spent more time worrying about water, feeling their safety/security was compromised
while looking for water and praying for water more than younger subjects. Because of this, older
subjects reported more positive changes than younger subjects. That said, the analysis showed
that all respondents overwhelmingly used words with positive connotations regarding the impact
of clean water infrastructure as opposed to negative ones.
Table 4.9 below provides further insight into the change variables for each community
surveyed by detailing the specific amount of progress in each survey area. The change variables
were determined by subtracting the perceived effects before installing a borehole in the
community from the perceived impact after a borehole was installed. The table also includes the
improvement index that summarizes all standardized variables. The improvement index provides
a single number representing how much respondents in each community are above or below
average relative to all the other respondents regarding the benefit they experienced from
borehole development.
Angwan
Madaki 10 2.9 0 11 20 5 12.9 24 0 24 0 24 0
Ambu 10 2.1 .5 3.5 6.2 4.1 12.4 13.9 .2 20.2 6.2 16.6 .1
Agyaragu 10 1.7 0 3.1 6.6 60 121 29.2 6 43 0 23 0
Akpoakla 7 5.3 1 3.7 8 5.1 14.7 12.6 .3 14.4 1.3 6.1 2.1
Ankolo 10 2.8 0 2.5 6 10.6 34.9 24 0 24 0 24 0
Ninkada 10 2.3 0 12.3 25.8 14.1 24.5 24 0 31.2 0 20.4 0
Ngha Bar 10 5.4 1.3 4.8 9.3 6.5 14.4 5.6 .5 14.2 1.2 8.6 .6
Angwan
Jatau 10 1.8 0 8.7 16.9 9.8 12.7 24 0 24 0 24 0
Age
37 and
younger
97 3.74 .4 4.6 9.4 10.4 22.5 18.3 1.1 22.5 1 17.2 .3
38 and older 78 3.3 .1 4.3 9.5 14.7 33.4 22.8 .04 24.8 .4 22.4 .3
53
Table 4.9 Change Variables and Improvement Index by Community
Table 4.9 Change Variables and Improvement Index by Community
The improvement index provides insight into community response variations and
highlights differences in responses amongst the 18 communities surveyed. This index sums all
1. Fewer times, Subjects got sick from water per month after a borehole was installed.
2. Additional social events Subjects attended after a borehole was installed.
3. Additional hours spent on educational or vocational activities per month after a
freshwater borehole was installed.
4. Fewer hours spent per month worrying about water after installing a freshwater
borehole.
5. Fewer hours per month, the Subject’s safety and/or security were compromised while
you were looking for and collecting water after a freshwater borehole was installed.
6. Fewer hours spent per month praying for water after a freshwater borehole was
installed.
Community N
1
(mean)
2
(mean)
3
(mean)
4
(mean)
5
(mean)
6
(mean)
Improvement
Index (mean)
Washo 10 2.6 4.9 8.4 10.3 16.95 10.4 -3.05
Angwan
Manasara 10 7.5 4.35 2.6 23.6 23.6 19.2 1.39
Ngha
Gbuden 10 4 4.4 9.9 14.4 18.2 15.5 -1.43
Kwolla 10 2.85 4.1 17.4 24 24 24 .97
Yanku 10 3.2 4.6 24.4 24 24 24 1.54
Tudu-Uku 10 3.35 3 6.7 23.6 23.6 23.6 .27
Angwan
Maikanzo 10 2.6 3.5 41.9 24 24 24 1.95
Janruwa
Kaduna 8 3.375 4.875 5.125 9.125 16.375 6.875 -3.5
Chunche
Mada 10 2.7 3.8 31.1 24 24 24 1.52
Angwan
Badugu 10 3 3.1 -9.4 24 24 21.6 -.77
Angwan
Madaki 10 2.9 9 7.9 24 24 24 1.54
Ambu 10 1.6 2.7 8.3 13.7 14 16.5 -3.09
Agyaragu 10 1.7 3.5 61 23.2 43 23 4.04
Akpoakla 7 4.29 4.29 9.57 10 13.14 4 -3.58
Ankolo 10 2.8 3.5 24.3 24 24 24 1.16
Ninkada 10 2.3 13.45 10.4 24 31.2 20.4 2.61
Ngha Bar 10 4.1 4.5 7.9 5.1 13 8 -3.79
Angwan
Jatau 10 1.8 8.2 -2.9 24 24 24 0.44
54
the standardized variables and creates a single number that represents how much above average
or below average the responses are relative to all the other respondents in terms of the benefit
they experienced (now vs. before) across all six domains. An example of this variation is the
Washo Community compared to the Chunche Mada Community, where ten subjects were
surveyed in each community. In Washo, improvements were seen in each area surveyed;
however, the improvements were not as dramatic as in Chunch Mada, which was 1.52 above the
mean improvement amongst the communities, while Washo was -3.05 under the mean amongst
the communities.
Summary
The impact of clean water infrastructure has wide-ranging effects in the six areas
assessed. Though the extent of the impact may vary, especially in different regions, the perceived
effect is mainly beneficial. Each area assessed can and should be further evaluated to identify
opportunities for improvement; these findings should be compiled and managed through a
continuous improvement cycle to ensure lessons learned and program optimization are
implemented and managed.
55
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSON & CONCLUSION
This study sought to uncover insight into the relationship between the provision of a
clean water borehole and the associated consumer wellness effects of such a provision. In
addition, the study served as a program evaluation of the borehole intervention program
instituted by Partners For Water and Chuga and Friends Foundation. Improvements in perceived
wellness were experienced in every area surveyed, and valuable insights that will improve the
program were uncovered. The most dramatic changes occurred in the perceived beneficial effects
of subject health and hygiene, psychological wellness, and safety and security.
Key Findings & Implications
A critical and primary finding of this study is that each community surveyed as part of
this study has embraced community ownership and responsibility for the borehole provided to
their community; this is vital as each community must take control of the responsibility of
borehole stewardship and any associated risk associated with the borehole for sustained change
to take root. In every category surveyed, most subjects felt that providing a clean water borehole
positively affected their wellness. Specific notable outcomes and study implications are as
follows.
1. Subjects reported a dramatic decrease in the number of times they got sick per month
from consuming or bathing in water after a clean water borehole was installed in their
community. These findings indicate that the provision of water has beneficial health
effects on consumers.
2. Significant increases in community participation and harmony were reported after
installing clean water infrastructure; this suggests that the installation of clean water
infrastructure has beneficial community/social effects.
56
3. Educational & vocational participation increased after installing a clean water borehole,
suggesting that installing clean water infrastructure stimulates educational participation
and economic activity.
4. Subjects reported a significant decrease in the amount of time they spent worrying about
water after a clean water borehole was installed in their community, and many subjects
reported their confidence had improved because of the water being brought to their
community. These findings indicate that water infrastructure benefits the consumer’s
psyche.
5. Subjects reported a dramatic change in their perception of their safety and security after
clean water infrastructure was installed in their community. This finding indicates that
local and accessible access to water improves the safety and security of consumers, an
important finding that presents an effective deterrence to gender-based violence.
6. The amount of time subjects spent praying for water decreased substantially, and over a
third of respondents attributed the provision of water in their community to the
benevolence of a higher power.
These findings mirror environmental public health research findings over the past century
that have concluded that clean water improves health and hygiene and brings light to other wellbeing benefits. While the findings of each of the six areas surveyed in this study are important,
findings related to improved safety & security and psyche are critical and speak to the farreaching impact of clean water infrastructure. Although the above findings serve as the
conclusive takeaways for this study, they do not exhaustively capture other potential effects or
perceptions related to providing clean water infrastructure.
Potential Bias & Limitations of Findings
57
Because of the high quantity of agreeable responses to the closed-ended questions, it
became apparent that social-desirability bias may be a concern. The interviewer addressed the
perceived social desirability bias and ensured that the subjects understood that their transparency
and individual perception were critical components of the research process. Because of the
variability in open-ended responses, the data collection team was reassured that this bias was
adequately addressed.
As discussed in Chapter 1, the study's scope is limited to the perceived effects of the
subjects involved in the research. It does not conclusively assert that the same effects will or
have been experienced across the country of Nigeria, the continent of Africa, or anywhere else in
the world. That said, the 18 communities represented in this study are typical of many
communities across Nasarawa state or Nigeria. These communities are underdeveloped in terms
of education, economic opportunities, and infrastructure and are typical regarding religious
values. Because of this, it can be inferred that similar outcomes would be experienced across the
region.
Another limitation of the study is the study’s focus on women. While most of the benefits
expressed by the study’s subjects are likely to be experienced by men in the community, it is not
expected that men would express the same improvements related to safety and psyche the female
subjects have; this is because men are not likely to experience safety/security concerns while
looking for water and do not worry about water collection (because they do not typically do so).
History effects should also be considered when contemplating study limitations. While
many of these impacts discussed in the preceding may be because of the installation of clean
water infrastructure, other events that may have happened in the environment could have
affected subject responses. Potential history effects that could apply include but are not limited to
58
increased inflation rates, the introduction of agricultural training programs in the area, and
transportation infrastructure development (interstate highway) in the region.
Contributions to Practice
During data collection, it was observed that the maintenance of several boreholes was
subpar. This finding is important and provides valuable insight into the significance of timely
and effective borehole maintenance and sustainability, which is critical to ensuring the sustained
effectiveness of the borehole intervention program. It was also observed in several communities
that some communities do not utilize the newly provided clean water boreholes and instead
gather and consume unclean water. These findings offer critical experiential insight and allow for
practical improvements in NGO planning related to borehole operations and maintenance and
training development related to water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) education.
The conclusion and findings of this evaluation are invaluable and should be used to
optimize NGO practices to maximize social impact. Specifically, the key findings and
implications of the report can be leveraged to highlight the program's effectiveness and used to
bolster donor investment and government support. Specifically, these findings can be referenced
as an example of the efficacy of borehole intervention programs in producing social change, thus
providing a template to other NGOs desiring to effect social change. In a broader sense, these
findings exemplify the potential social and wellness effects of infrastructure development in
developing regions.
The evaluation method used has been effective in exploring the perceived effects of the
installation of clean water infrastructure in the six areas surveyed; however, this evaluation and
the methodology used represent the proverbial “tip of the iceberg” concerning opportunities for
researching, evaluating, and optimizing NGO practices related to maximizing consumer
59
wellness. The report's findings should be used as a foundation for future evaluation undertakings
that can be used to progress the practice further.
Recommendations for Future Research & Anecdotal Observations during Data Collection
This study assessed the wellness effects of clean water infrastructure on consumer health,
hygiene, social, vocational, educational, psychological, security, and spiritual wellness. Future
research undertakings should consider additional social elements that may be affected by the
provision of clean water infrastructure. Additionally, several observations that should be further
explored and researched were made during data collection; these observations inform the
program evaluation rather than the research question; the observations include the following:
1. Future research undertakings related to the perceived wellness effects of clean water
infrastructure on consumer health, hygiene, social, vocational, educational,
psychological, security, and spiritual wellness should focus on men.
a. A study focused on the perceptions will provide a fuller picture of the
comprehensive effects of clean water infrastructure at the consumer level.
2. In several communities, clean water uptake from the borehole had slowed because of
increasing/inflated fuel costs required to power the generator to pump water; this resulted
in some community members reverting to previous methods of foraging for and gathering
water. Each community is responsible for funding the generator's cost to pump water
from the borehole.
a. Such a phenomenon presents several questions, including but not limited to the
following: How does economic inflation affect clean water uptake? How can the
value of clean water be increased to justify increased operation costs? Can
alternative, low-cost energy methods be employed to power borehole pumps?
60
3. A remnant of community members still choose to engage in traditional water retrieval
methods from unclean sources rather than navigate modern inconveniences (e.g., waiting
in line to access water from the community borehole, adhering to community rules for
when water can be pumped, adhering to community rules related to water quantities).
This observation made it apparent that some community members still lack a
comprehensive understanding of the importance of progress in WASH.
a. Questions related to this include: Is educating consumers on the dangers of
consuming or bathing with unsanitary water and the vital nature of only using
water from sanitary sources through traditional education methodologies
sufficient? What alternative education methods should be employed?
4. The maintenance on a few boreholes was somewhat subpar; however, all were functional.
Maintenance of the boreholes is the responsibility of the community water committee,
not the NGO. Establishing maintenance standards and ensuring each community adheres
to these standards is pertinent.
a. Items that should be answered related to this include the following: Can an
infrastructure inspection and maintenance program be implemented without
overly burdening the NGO or the infrastructure-receiving community? Are
community members capable of providing needed maintenance? Should the cost
of perpetual maintenance be included in borehole project cost projections?
5. There were regional variations in the nature subject responses, and the causes of this
should be further studied.
a. These variations may be explained by topographic, access, religious, cultural,
traditional, and economic dissimilarities amongst the communities surveyed. As
61
discussed in the preceding, during data collection, variations in practices related
to water stewardship were anecdotally observed in several communities,
especially those geographically more remote than others. To confirm the reasons
for this variation, future research and/or program evaluation undertakings should
undertake the following research question: How do regional community
variations affect the perceived impact of clean water infrastructure?
Several of the observations above, especially those related to variations in clean water
uptake and variations in the attitudes of subjects, may be explained by the theory of diffusion of
innovations developed by E.M. Rogers, which holds that the adoption of new behaviors and/or
attitudes takes time to diffuse across a social system; adoption is not simultaneous; instead, it is a
process whereby some people are more apt to adopt the innovation than others (Rogers, 1962).
These observations require separate and thorough consideration through specific research
undertakings, further program evaluation, or other audit undertakings.
Conclusion
The study’s findings support the hypothesis that clean water infrastructure positively
affects consumer health, hygiene, social, vocational, educational, psychological, security, and
spiritual wellness. The subject's responses to the open-ended questions varied but principally
affirmed the above conclusion. That said, a small percentage of subjects did not experience
perceived wellness benefits from providing clean water infrastructure in their community. The
key findings & implications have provided an excellent baseline to be used as the foundation for
continual borehole development program improvement.
62
REFERENCES
Acey, C. (2010). Gender and community mobilisation for urban water infrastructure investment
in southern Nigeria. Gender & Development, 11-26.
Adeniran, A., Daniell, K. A., & Pittock, J. (2021). Water Infrastructure Development in Nigeria:
Trend, Size, and Purpose. Water, 1-23.
Ambuehl, B., Kunwar, B. M., Schertenleib, A., Marks, S. J., & Inauen, J. (2022). Can
participation promote psychological ownership of a shared resource? An intervention
study of community-based safe water infrastructure. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 1-11.
Awar, S. A., Khair, H., Osman, N., Ucenic, T.-E., Sallam, G., & Mak, S. (2022). Perceived
Wellness Measured by the National Wellness Institute's Wellness Focus Survey Tool
among Women in Al Ain, UAE: A Sentinel Study. International Journal of Nutrition,
Pharmacology, Neurological Diseases, 282.
Baporikar, N. (2016). Infrastructure Development as a Catalyst for Social-Economic
Advancement. International Journal of System Dynamics Applications (IJSDA) , 101-
114.
Barlow, M., & Grant, M. (2021). Water is a Human Right: Growing the Water Justice
Movement. Peace and Freedom, 10+.
Bell, S. A., & Aggleton, P. (2012). Integrating Ethnographic Principles in NGO Monitoring and
Impact Evaluation . International Development, 795-807.
Bolarinwa, O. A., Tessema, Z. T., & Ahinkorah, B. O. (2021). Multi-Level Analysis and Spatial
Interpolation of Distributions and Predictors of Childhood Diarrhea in Nigeria.
Environmental Health Insights, 1-14.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2022, October 18). Disease Impact of Unsafe
Water. Retrieved from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:
https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/global/disease-impact-of-unsafe-water.html
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods
Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Curtis, V., Dreibelbis, R., Buxton, H., Izang, N., Adekunle, D., & Aunger, R. (2019). Behaviour
settings theory applied to domestic water use in Nigeria: A new conceptual tool for the
study of routine behaviour. Social Science & Medicine, 1-8.
D. J. Lapworth, c. L., Nkhuwa, D. C., Okotto-Okotto, J., Pedley, S., Stuart, M. E., Tijani, M. N.,
& Wright, J. (2017). Urban groundwater quality in sub-Saharan Africa: current status and
implications for water security and public health. Hydrogeology Journal, 1093–1116.
63
D’Ostie-Racine, L., Dagenais, C., & Ridde, V. (2013). An evaluability assessment of a West
Africa-based Non-Governmental Organization's (NGO) progressive evaluation strategy.
Evaluation and Program Planning, 71-79.
Ewang, A. (2022, march 8). Nigeria Risks Falling Further Behind on Women’s Equality.
Retrieved from Human Rights Watch: https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/03/08/nigeriarisks-falling-further-behind-womens-equality
Falk, J., Globisch, B., Angelmahr, M., Schade, W., & Schenk-Mathes, H. (2022). Drinking
Water Supply in Rural Africa Based on a Mini-Grid Energy System—A Socio-Economic
Case Study for Rural Development. Sustainability, 1-19.
Filho, W. L., Totin, E., Franke, J. A., Andrew, S. M., Abubakar, I. R., Azadi, H., . . . Simpson,
N. P. (2022). Understanding responses to climate-related water scarcity in Africa. Science
of the Total Environment, 1-18.
George, T. (2023, January 20). Exploratory Research | Definition, Guide, & Examples. Retrieved
from scribbr.co.uk: https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/exploratory-researchdesign/
Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. (2020). Nigeria Integration of the SDG's into
National Development Planning. Abuja: Nigerian Office of the Senior Special Assistant
to the President on SDGs.
Graham, J. P., Hirai, M., & Kim, S.-S. (2016). An Analysis of Water Collection Labor among
Women and Children in 24 Sub-Saharan African Countries. PLoS ONE, 11(6): e0155981.
Hanjra, M. A., Ferede, T., & Gutta, D. G. (2009). Reducing poverty in sub-Saharan Africa
through investments in water and other priorities. Agricultural Water Management,
1062–1070.
Harris, P., & Leeuw, E. D. (2023). Infrastructure and health: laying down the big connections for
well-being. Oxford Open Infrastructure and Health, 1-7.
Holtz, L., & Golubski, C. (2021, July 3). Addressing Africa’s extreme water insecurity.
Retrieved from Brookings: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/addressing-africasextreme-water-insecurity/
Holtz, L., & Golubski, C. (2021, July 23). Addressing Africa’s extreme water insecurity.
Retrieved from Brookings Institute: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/africa-infocus/2021/07/23/addressing-africas-extreme-water-insecurity/
Houweling, E. V., Ralph Hall, M. C., & Vance, E. (2017). ‘My Neighbour Drinks Clean Water,
While I Continue To Suffer’: An Analysis of the Intra-Community Impacts of a Rural
Water Supply Project in Mozambique. The Journal of Development Studies, 1147-1162.
Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pa, D. K. (2015). Likert Scale: Explored and Explained.
Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 396-403.
64
Kampmeier, C. (1996). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of The Learning Organization.
Journal of Management Consulting, 58.
Kaushik, V., & Walsh, C. A. (2019). Pragmatism as a Research Paradigm and Its Implications
for Social Work Research. Social Sciences, 1-17.
Kerr, L. A., Kritzer, a. P., & Cadrin, S. X. (2019). Strengths and limitations of before–after–
control–impact analysis for testing the effects of marine protected areas on managed
populations. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 1039–1051.
Kuete, Y. F., & Asongu, S. A. (2022). Infrastructure Development as a Prerequisite for Structural
Change in Africa. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1386–1412.
Kusumawaty, I., & Siswanto, A. (2021). Psychosocial Health: Hidden Effects in the Water
Supply and Sanitation Environment. Sriwijaya Journal of Environment, 93–98.
Leufvén, M., Vitrakoti, R., Bergström, A., KC, A., & Målqvist, M. (2015). Dimensions of
Learning Organizations Questionnaire (DLOQ) in a low-resource health care setting in
Nepal. Health Research Policy and Systems, 3-8.
MacDonald, A. M., & Davies, J. (2000). A brief review of groundwater for rural water supply in
sub-Saharan Africa. Nottingham: British Geological Survey.
MacDonald, A., & Calow, R. (2009). Developing groundwater for secure rural water supplies in
Africa. Desalination, 546-556.
Mcleod, S. (2023, June 16). Simply Psychology. Retrieved from Likert Scale Questionnaire:
Examples & Analysis: https://www.simplypsychology.org/likert-scale.html
Nasarawa State Government . (n.d., n.d. n.d.). About Nasarawa State. Retrieved from
nasawarastate.gov: https://nasarawastate.gov.ng/about-nasarawa-state/
National Population Commission and National Bureau of Statistics Estimates. (2016). National
Population Estimates. Abuja: Nigerian National Government.
Nayebare, J. G., Owor, M. M., Kulabako, R., & Taylor, R. G. (2021). Fecal contamination
pathways of shallow groundwater in low-income urban areas: implications for water
resource planning and management. Water Practice and Technology, 285-296.
OCHA. (2018). Reference Map of Nasawara SNigeriatate. New York: United Nations Office for
the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
Odo, C., Onalu, C., Ebimgbo, S., Nwafor, N., & Ebimgbo, S. (2021). Factors associated with the
prevalence of diarrhoea among children in rural areas of Enugu State, Nigeria: Practice
considerations for social workers. International Social Work, 1-13.
Okafor, I. P., Akinyemi, O. T., Wika-Kobani, B. N., Olubodunl, T., & Eze, U. T. (2022).
Childhood diarrhoea: a cross-sectional survey on maternal knowledge, hygienic practices
65
and use of oral zinc for home management in a Nigerian community. The Pan African
Medical Journal, 1-18.
Prud’homme, R. (2004). Annual Bank Conference on Development Economics: Infrastructure
and Development. Washington DC: The World Bank.
Ramli, A. T., Aliyu, A. S., Agba, E. H., & Saleh, M. A. (2014). Effective Dose from Natural
Background Radiation in Keffi and Akwanga Towns, Central Nigeria. Iranian Journal of
Radiation Research (IJRR), 47-52.
Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. Free Press of Glencoe.
Saklind, N. J. (2009). The Role and Importance of Research. In N. J. Saklind, Exploring
Research, Seventh Edition (p. 5). Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
Shelton, C. D., & Darling, J. R. (2003). From theory to practice: using new science concepts to
create learning organizations. The Learning Organization, 353-360.
Small, S. F., & Rodgers, Y. v. (2023). The gendered effects of investing in physical and social
infrastructure. World Development, 1-18.
Strout, K. A., & Howard, E. P. (2012). The Six Dimensions of Wellness and Cognition in Aging
Adults. Journal of Holistic Nursing, 195-204.
The World Bank. (2020, October 1). Nigeria Human Capital Index 2020. Retrieved from The
World Bank:
https://databankfiles.worldbank.org/public/ddpext_download/hci/HCI_2pager_NGA.pdf
The World Bank. (2020, October 1). Nigeria: Human Capital Index 2020. Retrieved from The
World Bank:
https://databankfiles.worldbank.org/public/ddpext_download/hci/HCI_2pager_NGA.pdf
The World Bank. (2021, May 26). Nigeria: Ensuring Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for All.
Retrieved from The World Bank:
https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2021/05/26/nigeria-ensuring-watersanitation-and-hygiene-for-all
The World Bank. (2021, May 26). Nigeria: Ensuring Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for All.
Retrieved from worldbank.org:
https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2021/05/26/nigeria-ensuring-watersanitation-and-hygiene-forall#:~:text=In%202019%2C%20a%20combination%20of%20inadequate%20infrastructu
re%2C%20a,while%20167%20million%20couldn%E2%80%99t%20access%20basic%2
0handwas
The World Bank. (2021, n.d. n.d.). The World Bank. Retrieved from Population total: Nigeria:
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=NG
66
The World Bank. (2022, March 22). Deep Structural Reforms Guided by Evidence Are Urgently
Needed to Lift Millions of Nigerians Out of Poverty, says New World Bank Report.
Retrieved from The World Bank: https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/pressrelease/2022/03/21/afw-deep-structural-reforms-guided-by-evidence-are-urgentlyneeded-to-lift-millions-of-nigerians-out-of-poverty
Tökpö, N., & Siné, D. (2021). Impact of the proliferation of boreholes on the quantitative state of
groundwater in the municipality of Ratoma–Conakry. African Scientific Journal, 187-
205.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
(2022). Vital Statistics Rapid Release: Report No. 23. Atlanta: Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention.
U.S. Department of State. (2022). 2021 Report on International Religious Freedom: Nigeria.
Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of State.
UNESCO. (2023, May 3). Imminent risk of a global water crisis, warns the UN World Water
Development Report 2023. Retrieved from UNESCO.org:
https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/imminent-risk-global-water-crisis-warns-un-worldwater-development-report-2023
UNICEF. (2019). Water, Sanitation, Hygiene National Outcome Routine Mapping 2019: A
Report of Survey Findings. New York: UNICEF.
UNICEF. (2020, November 11). New survey reveals progress and gaps in Nigerians’ access to
water, sanitation, and hygiene services. Retrieved from UNICEF:
https://www.unicef.org/nigeria/stories/new-survey-reveals-progress-and-gaps-nigeriansaccess-water-sanitation-and-hygiene-services
UNICEF. (2022, March 22). Africa to drastically accelerate progress on water, sanitation and
hygiene – report. Retrieved from unicef.org: https://www.unicef.org/senegal/en/pressreleases/africa-drastically-accelerate-progress-water-sanitation-and-hygiene-report
UNICEF. (2022, December 1). Diarrhoea remains a leading killer of young children, despite the
availability of a simple treatment solution. Retrieved from UNICEF.org:
https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-health/diarrhoeal-disease/
UNICEF Nigeria. (2023). Education Knowledge Products. Abuja: UNICEF Nigeria.
United Nations. (2016, March 18). United Nations. Retrieved from Secretary-General Warns
Two-Thirds of Global Population Could Face Water-Stressed Conditions within Next
Decade, in Message for International Forests Day:
https://press.un.org/en/2016/sgsm17610.doc.htm#:~:text=By%202025%2C%20nearly%2
01.8%20billion,central%20to%20addressing%20climate%20change.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. (2022). World
Population Prospects 2022: Summary of Results. New York: The United Nations.
67
United Nations Department of Public Information. (2022, June 21). World population projected
to reach 9.8 billion in 2050,. Retrieved from United Nations:
https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/events/pdf/other/21/21June_FINAL
%20PRESS%20RELEASE_WPP17.pdf
United Nations Development Programme. (2022, September 8). Human Development Reports.
Retrieved from United Nations Development Programme: https://hdr.undp.org/datacenter/country-insights#/ranks
United Nations. (n.d., n.d. n.d.). Regional Information Centre for Western Europe. Retrieved
from United Nations: https://unric.org/en/sdg-6/
United Nations Population Division. (2022). World Population Prospects. New York: United
Nations. Retrieved from United Nations Population Fund:
https://www.unfpa.org/data/world-population/NG
University of Texas Austin Libraries. (2023, March 15). Quantitative and Qualitative Research:
What is Qualitative Research? Retrieved from the University of Texas Austin Libraries:
https://libguides.uta.edu/quantitative_and_qualitative_research/qual#:~:text=What%20is
%20qualitative%20research%3F%20Qualitative%20research%20is%20a,as%20meaning
-making%20agents%20in%20their%20every%20day%20lives.
Villholth, K. G. (2013). Groundwater irrigation for smallholders in Sub-Saharan Africa – a
synthesis of current knowledge to guide sustainable outcomes. Water International, 369-
391.
WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene. (2023).
Estimates on the use of water, sanitation, and hygiene in Nigeria. Geneva:
WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene.
Wickramarathne, P. D., Phuoc, J. C., & Albattat, A. R. (2020). A Review of Wellness
DImension Models: For the Advancement of The Society. European Journal of Social
Science Studies, 185-198.
Workman, C. L. (2019). Perceptions of drinking water cleanliness and health-seeking
behaviours: A qualitative assessment of household water safety in Lesotho Africa. Global
Public Health, 1347-1359.
World Economic Forum. (2022). Global Gender Gap Report. Cologny/Geneva: World
Economic Forum.
World Health Organization. (2021, n.d. n.d.). WHO Africa: Topics: Water. Retrieved from
World Health Organization: https://www.afro.who.int/health-topics/water
World Health Organization. (2022, March 21). Drinking-water. Retrieved from World Health
Organization: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/drinking-water
68
World Health Organization. (2017, May 2). Diarrhoeal disease. Retrieved from World Health
Organization: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/diarrhoeal-disease
Yaro, O. O., Polycarp, B., & Sule, E. A. (2018). Poverty Study of Lafia Metropolis, Nasarawa
State – Nigeria. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 41-47.
Yu, S., & McLaughlin, D. A. (2013). Program Evaluation and Impact Assessment in
International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs): Exploring Roles, Benefits, and
Challenges. Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, 23–36.
69
Appendix 1: Semi-structured Interview Questions
Demographics
1) How old are you?
2) What is the name of your community?
3) How long have you lived in your community?
Health/Hygiene Impact
4) Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water being
made available in my community has improved my health and hygiene.”
a) Prompt for agree/disagree strongly or moderately, or neither agree nor disagree.
5) How many times per month did you get sick from drinking or bathing in water before a
freshwater borehole was installed in your community?
a) How many times per month do you get sick from drinking or bathing in water now?
6) How has consuming and regularly bathing in clean water affected your health and hygiene?
Please provide one or more examples.
Community/Social Impact
7) Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water being
made available in my community has improved social harmony and brought the community
closer together.”
a) Prompt for agree/disagree strongly or moderately, or neither agree nor disagree.
8) How many social events did you attend in your community per month water before a
freshwater borehole was installed in your community?
a) How many social events do you attend per month in your community now?
9) How has clean and accessible water in your community affected your community’s social
harmony? Please provide one or more examples.
Educational/Vocational Impact
10) Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water being
made available in my community has allowed me and/or my family more time to focus on
education.”
a) Prompt for agree/disagree strongly or moderately, or neither agree nor disagree.
70
11) How many hours did you spend on educational or vocational (employment, occupation)
activities per month before a freshwater borehole was installed in your community?
a) How many hours do you spend on educational or vocational activities per month now?
12) How has clean and accessible water in your community affected your and/or your family’s
educational and vocational opportunities? Please provide one or more examples.
Psychological Impact
13) Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water being
made available in my community has positively impacted my psyche and outlook on the
future.”
a) Prompt for agree/disagree strongly or moderately, or neither agree nor disagree.
14) How many hours did you worry about water before a freshwater borehole was installed in
your community?
a) How many hours per month do you worry about water now?
15) How has clean and accessible water being made available in your community affected your
psyche and outlook on the future? Please provide one or more examples.
Safety/Security Impact
16) Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water being
made available in my community has increased my safety and security.”
a) Prompt for agree/disagree strongly or moderately, or neither agree nor disagree.
17) How many hours per month was your safety and security compromised while you were
looking for and collecting water before a freshwater borehole was installed in your
community?
a) How many hours per month is your safety and security compromised now?
18) How has clean and accessible water being made available in your community affected your
safety and security? Please provide one or more examples.
Religious/Spiritual
19) Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: “Clean and accessible water being
made available in my community is an answer to my prayers.”
a) Prompt for agree/disagree strongly or moderately, or neither agree nor disagree.
20) How many hours per month did you spend praying for water before a freshwater borehole
was installed in your community?
a) How many hours per month do you spend praying for water now?
71
21) Do you associate the provision of clean and accessible water in your community with your
religious/spiritual beliefs? If so, how?
72
Appendix 2: Informed Consent for Research
Study Title: The Perceived Effects of Clean Water Infrastructure
in Nasarawa State, Nigeria
Principal Investigator: Jason Townsell, townsell@usc.edu
Faculty Advisor: William Leach, Ph.D. william.d.leach@usc.edu
Department: School of Public Policy, University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, California 90089-0626
Introduction
We invite you to take part in a research study. Please take as much time as you need to read the
consent form. You may want to discuss it with your family or friends. If you find any of the
language difficult to understand, please ask questions. If you decide to participate, you will be
asked to sign this form. A copy of the signed form will be provided to you.
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to provide insight into the perceived effects (beyond improved
health) of installing freshwater infrastructure in rural communities in Nasarawa State, Nigeria.
Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following question: What perceived impact does clean
water infrastructure have on consumer health, hygiene, social, vocational, educational,
psychological, security, and spiritual wellness?
Procedures
Participation in the study involves a one-on-one interview. The interview includes approximately
20 questions related to your perception of the effects of the provision of clean water
infrastructure in your community. The interview will take about 15 to 30 minutes and will take
place in a common area in the community.
Benefits
There are no direct benefits to you from taking part in this study. However, your participation in
this study may help us learn how to improve the process of building freshwater infrastructure in
rural communities. If you would like to receive information about the results of the study,
provide your contact information at the end of this form.
Privacy/Confidentiality
We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we
are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. Efforts will be
made to limit the use and disclosure of your personal information to people who are required to
review it. We may publish the information from this study in journals or present it at meetings. If
we do, we will not use your name.
The University of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) and Human Subject’s
Protections Program (HSPP) may review your records.
73
Possible Future Use of Data
Participants will not be identified in the results. I will take reasonable measures to protect the
security of all information you provide. All data will be de-identified before publication or
presentation. I may share your de-identified data with other researchers in the future. If you are
not comfortable with this, do not participate in this study.
Breach of Confidentiality
There is a small risk that people who are not connected with this study will learn your identity or
your personal information.
Risk and Discomforts
We do not anticipate any risks or discomforts from participating in this research. If a question
makes you uncomfortable, you can choose to skip or stop answering any questions you don’t
want to answer.
Payments/Compensation
You will not be compensated for your participation in this research.
Voluntary Participation
It is your choice whether to participate. If you choose to participate, you may change your mind
and leave the study at any time. If you decide not to participate, or choose to end your
participation in this study, you will not be penalized.
Contact Information
If you have questions, concerns, complaints, or think the research has hurt you, talk to the study
investigator, Jason Townsell, townsell@usc.
This research has been reviewed by the USC Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB is a
research review board that reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and
welfare of research participants. Contact the IRB if you have questions about your rights as a
research participant or you have complaints about the research. You may contact the IRB at
(323) 442-0114 or by email at hrpp@usc.edu.
74
Appendix 3: IRB Exemption Letter
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board
3720 S. Flower Street, Suite 325
Los Angeles, CA 90089
Telephone: (323) 442-0114
Fax: (323) 224-8389
Email: irb@usc.edu
Date: Oct 12, 2023, 12:12pm Action Taken:
Principal Jason Townsell,
Investigator: SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Faculty Advisor: Dr. William Leach
SOL PRICE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
Co-Investigator(s):
Project Title: The effect of Clean Water
Study ID: UP-23-00886
Funding:
Your submission was reviewed and determined to be exempt §46.104(d) (2) on 10/12/2023 by
the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB).
Any Unanticipated Problems Involving Risks to Subjects or Others, Deviations from the
approved Submission, or complaints, must be reported to the IRB in accordance with University
of Southern California Human Research Protection Program policies and procedures.
75
If there are significant changes that increase the risk to subjects, revisions to study
materials/documents, or if the funding has changed, you must submit an amendment to the IRB
for review. For other revisions to the application, use the “Send Message to IRB” link.
iStar Application and contents dated 10/06/2023 were reviewed.
Attachments
No documents
:
Social-behavioral health-related interventions or health-outcome studies must register with clinicaltrials.gov or other International
Community of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) approved registries in order to be published in an ICJME journal. The ICMJE will not
accept studies for publication unless the studies are registered prior to enrollment, despite the fact that these studies are not applicable
“clinical trials” as defined by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). For support with registration, go to www.clinicaltrials.gov or
contact Jean Chan (jeanbcha@usc.edu, 323-442-2825).
Approved Documents: view
Important
The principal investigator for this study is responsible for obtaining all necessary approvals before
commencing research. Please be sure that you have satisfied applicable requirements, for example conflicts of
interest, bio safety, radiation safety, biorepositories, credentialing, data security, sponsor approval,
clinicaltrials.gov or school approval. IRB approval does not convey approval to commence research in the
event that other requirements have not been satisfied.
This is an auto-generated email. Please do not respond directly to this message using the "reply"
address. A response sent in this manner cannot be answered. If you have further questions,
please contact iStar Support at (323) 276-2238 or istar@usc.edu.
The contents of this email are confidential and intended for the specified recipients only. If you
have received this email in error, please notify istar@usc.edu and delete this message.
76
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Water scarcity and its associated effects are among the world’s most pressing concerns. One of the answers to this concern has been the proliferation of clean water infrastructure in areas that lack water infrastructure. This research study highlights the perceived effects of clean water infrastructure on consumer wellness in Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Specifically, the study utilizes a semi-structured survey with open-ended and closed-ended questions to establish an understanding of consumer perceptions related to the relationship between the installation of clean water infrastructure and its perceived wellness effects in six areas: health and hygiene, community/social, education and/or vocation, psychological well-being, safety and security, and religious/spiritual life. The study focuses on the perceptions of female consumers, as they are the primary burden carriers related to water collection and familial provision. The female subjects were interviewed in person in their respective communities to identify and understand consumer perceptions transparently. Results of the study indicate that the installation of clean water infrastructure has a beneficial wellness effect on consumers in each of the areas surveyed, with the perceived beneficial effects in health and hygiene, psychological wellness, and safety and security being the most significant. Based on the research, it can be concluded that providing clean water infrastructure benefits consumers in multiple ways; however, when considering the high rates of gender-based violence in the country, improvements in wellness related to safety and security may be the most critical of the findings.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Lessons learned from the FHWA State Infrastructure Bank (SIB) program, 1995 to 2016
PDF
Water security, national security and MCIWest: a grounded theory for operationalizing risk management
PDF
Unraveling the threads of tragedy: a public health exploration of adverse childhood experiences as precursors to targeted school violence and protective factors for mitigation strategies
PDF
Green healthcare, an environmentally sustainable methodology: an investigation of the ecological impacts of the healthcare industry and the role of green initiatives in sustainable medical services
PDF
Emerging catastrophes in slums of the developing world: considerations for policy makers
PDF
The crisis of potable water in Mexico City: institutional factors and water property rights as conditions for creating adequate metropolitan water governance
PDF
Workplace conflict and employment retaliation in law enforcement; an examination of the causes, effects and viable solutions
PDF
A research on water conservation and governance networks in Southern California
PDF
Education based incarceration: educate to change the organizational culture of corrections in the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department
PDF
Adoption and implementation of innovative diagnostic tools for Alzheimer's Disease: challenges and barriers in primary care
PDF
Mitigating the energy efficiency gap through Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE): an assessment of the HERO Program in Riverside County, CA
PDF
A megaproject matrix: ideology, discourse and regulation in the Delhi Metro Rail
PDF
Planning care with the patient in the room: a patient-focused approach to reducing heart failure readmissions
PDF
Outcomes-based contracting through impact bonds: ties to social innovation, systems change, and international development
PDF
The long-term impact of COVID-19 on commute, employment, housing, and environment in the post-pandemic era
PDF
Teachers' perceptions of an effective teacher evaluation system and its key components in China
PDF
Health impact assessment, the concept, science, and application in China
PDF
The effects of interlocal collaboration on local economic performance: investigation of Korean cases
PDF
Global health diplomacy: a new era of health in U.S. foreign policy
PDF
Developing and implementing a GIS-based framework to identify optimal locations for clean water wells in sub-Saharan Africa
Asset Metadata
Creator
Townsell, Jason Robert
(author)
Core Title
The perceived effects of clean water infrastructure in Nasarawa State, Nigeria
School
School of Policy, Planning and Development
Degree
Doctor of Policy, Planning & Development
Degree Program
Planning and Development,Policy
Degree Conferral Date
2024-12
Publication Date
09/26/2024
Defense Date
08/20/2024
Publisher
Los Angeles, California
(original),
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
borehole,boreholes,clean water,gender-based violence,Hygiene,Nasarawa,Nigeria,OAI-PMH Harvest,SDG6,sustainable development goals,WASH,water infrastructure,wellness
Format
theses
(aat)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Leach, William (
committee chair
), Feldmann-Jensen, Shirley (
committee member
), Robertson, Peter (
committee member
)
Creator Email
jtownsell3@gmail.com,townsell@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC11399B9ZN
Unique identifier
UC11399B9ZN
Identifier
etd-TownsellJa-13554.pdf (filename)
Legacy Identifier
etd-TownsellJa-13554
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
theses (aat)
Rights
Townsell, Jason Robert
Internet Media Type
application/pdf
Type
texts
Source
20240926-usctheses-batch-1214
(batch),
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
borehole
boreholes
clean water
gender-based violence
Nasarawa
SDG6
sustainable development goals
WASH
water infrastructure