18.09.2013 Views

RURAL BANGLADESH - PreventionWeb

RURAL BANGLADESH - PreventionWeb

RURAL BANGLADESH - PreventionWeb

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Socioeconomic Profiles of WFP Operational Areas and Beneficiaries<br />

water, placing a huge burden on household activities. Children suffer from diarrhoea,<br />

particularly during the rainy season, largely because water sources are unprotected and<br />

become easily contaminated. (Poor hygiene and sanitation practices also contribute to the<br />

prevalence of diarrhoea in CHT).<br />

Figure 10: Potable Water Source by WFP Priority Zone<br />

% of Households<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

Access to Potable Water by WFP Region<br />

CHT Coastal Drought N/W Char Haor<br />

Tubewell Dug well<br />

WFP Region<br />

Spring/ river/ pond Other sources<br />

Access to potable water does not vary by household socioeconomic status or sex of<br />

household head. Although many poor households throughout the other five zones of the<br />

country (besides CHT) do not have their own tubewells, most households are able to access<br />

clean potable water from neighbours’ tubewells. Tubewells, however, do not necessarily<br />

yield water all year round, especially in the Coastal and Haor Zones, where tubewell water<br />

dries up during the dry months of the year.<br />

Community focus group discussions did not disclose concern about arsenic from the<br />

tubewell water, except in the Char and Haor Zones, where villagers are compelled to drink<br />

tubewell water contaminated with arsenic in absence of alternative sources of drinking<br />

water. In cases where arsenic has been identified, most communities in the study have been<br />

able to shut down the tubewell and shift to other apparently arsenic-free tubewells.<br />

2.3 SANITATION PRACTICE<br />

Figure 11 outlines household sanitation practices disaggregated by socioeconomic status.<br />

The results suggest that a large proportion of all households – more than one-third of all<br />

households – do not use any latrine or rely on hanging latrines, which represent unsafe<br />

sanitary practices. Household sanitation behaviour varies widely by socioeconomic class.<br />

Most invisible poor households (56 percent) do not use latrines while non-vulnerable<br />

households either rely on a pit latrine (54 percent) or a flush toilet (37 percent).<br />

Sanitation practices also offer large regional variations. Latrine use is most prominent in the<br />

Coastal zone and the CHT, but significantly more households in the CHT also use hanging<br />

latrines. Disaggregated data indicate that in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, substantially more<br />

Marma, Bawn, Tripura and Murang households do not use latrines (39 percent) compared to<br />

Bengali and Chakma households (six and nine percent respectively). One quarter of Chakma<br />

households, however use hanging latrines.<br />

44

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!