IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v27y2025i1d10.1007_s10668-023-03992-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Priority regions for eliminating open defecation in Africa: implications for antimicrobial resistance

Author

Listed:
  • Omololu Ebenezer Fagunwa

    (Queens University Belfast
    Federal Ministry of Health)

  • Thobile Mthiyane

    (United Nations Children’s Fund)

  • Ayokunle Fagunwa

    (Federal Institute of Industrial Research Oshodi)

  • Kassim Idowu Olayemi
  • Alaoma Alozie

    (Oxford Business College)

  • Helen Onyeaka

    (University of Birmingham)

  • Adenike Akinsemolu

    (University of Birmingham
    The Green Institute)

  • Adegbola Ojo

    (School of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Leeds)

Abstract

Sanitation, which offers safe and effective methods for waste disposal, is important for development. However, in Africa and other developing regions, the prevalent practice of open defecation (OD) impedes attaining the sustainable development goals (SDGs). This research delves into the analysis of OD in Africa and proposes a three-tier priority system, comprising critical, high, and medium areas, through which developmental endeavours can be targeted. To achieve this, the study utilizes data from demographic and health surveys (DHS) and the World Bank. The rates of OD at country and sub-country/region levels were calculated to define the priority system, and regression analyses were used to determine predictors of OD practice. The findings are that Nigeria, Ethiopia, Niger, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Burkina Faso, and Chad have a high number of people struggling with open defecation. In addition, disparities in access to proper sanitation facilities were identified among impoverished individuals and those residing in rural areas. After adjusting for education and residence, the poorest are 43 times (95% confidence interval 42.443–45.290) more likely to practice open defecation in comparison with the wealthiest. Consequently, wealth index is a pivotal factor in eradicating open toileting. To address this pressing issue in Africa, it is imperative to prioritize evidence-based targeted interventions that concentrate on regions and communities urgently needing improved sanitation infrastructure and programmes. Special attention should be paid to West Africa since many of its communities are in the critical category. Poverty and inequality must be addressed and investments in sanitation infrastructure, behavioural change promotion, and support multistakeholder collaborations should be encouraged. To evaluate OD interventions and monitor health impact, variables such as antimicrobial resistance (AMR) should be included in important health surveys (e.g. DHS). This study is the largest meta-data analyses of OD in Africa detailing drivers and communities that should be prioritised on sanitation interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Omololu Ebenezer Fagunwa & Thobile Mthiyane & Ayokunle Fagunwa & Kassim Idowu Olayemi & Alaoma Alozie & Helen Onyeaka & Adenike Akinsemolu & Adegbola Ojo, 2025. "Priority regions for eliminating open defecation in Africa: implications for antimicrobial resistance," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 2675-2699, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s10668-023-03992-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-023-03992-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-023-03992-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-023-03992-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s10668-023-03992-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

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

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

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