4.8 Article

Predictors of Drinking Water Boiling and Bottled Water Consumption in Rural China: A Hierarchical Modeling Approach

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 51, Issue 12, Pages 6945-6956

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b01006

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [91744201-0]
  2. International Fund for Agricultural Development, a specialized United Nations agency
  3. Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Approximately two billion people drink unsafe water. Boiling is the most commonly used household water treatment (HWT) method globally and in China. HINT can make water safer, but sustained adoption is rare and bottled water consumption is growing. To successfully promote I-IVVT, an understanding of associated socioeconomic factors is critical. We collected survey data and water samples from 450 rural households in Guangxi Province, China. Covariates were grouped into blocks to hierarchically construct modified Poisson models and estimate risk ratios (RR) associated with boiling methods, bottled water, and untreated water. Female-headed households were most likely to boil (RR = 1.36, p < 0.01), and among boilers those using electric kettles rather than pots had higher income proxies (e.g., per capita TV ownership RR = 1.42, p < 0.01). Higher-income households with younger, literate, and male heads were more likely to purchase (frequently contaminated) bottled water, or use electric kettles if they boiled. Our findings show that boiling is not an undifferentiated practice, but one with different methods of varying effectiveness; environmental impact, and adoption across socioeconomic strata. Our results can inform programs to promote safer and more efficient boiling using electric kettles, and suggest that if rural China's economy continues to grow then bottled water use will increase.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available