4.3 Article

Formative Research Using Settings and Motives to Explore Child Faeces Disposal and Management in Rural Solomon Islands

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19169815

关键词

behaviour; sanitation; hygiene; children; gender; motives

资金

  1. Australian Government's Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade through the WATER FOR WOMEN FUND [WRA1031]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Unsafe child faeces management can have negative effects on children's health. There is a need for further research on CFM practices, habits, and settings in rural villages in Solomon Islands, in order to promote safe behaviors.
Unsafe child faeces management can lead to adverse health and wellbeing outcomes for children. In Solomon Islands, diarrhoeal disease is a leading cause of under-5 mortality, though there is limited research into CFM practices and promotion of safe behaviours. The formative research applied a Behaviour-Centred Design framework to investigate the habits, motives and settings related to child faeces management in rural Solomon Islands villages. Data were collected through structured recall demonstrations by caregivers (n = 61), household infrastructure observations (n = 57), semi-structured interviews with caregivers (n = 121) and community leaders (n = 30), focus group discussions (n = 26), and three participatory activities with caregivers. The findings identified a range of CFM-related behaviours, some of which would be considered safe and some, such as outside defecation and disposal to a waterway, as unsafe. Convenience is important in shaping CFM practice and may help health benefits to be achieved without women bearing the cost of an increased work burden. Nurture and disgust may provide the basis for behaviour change communication in SI as they have elsewhere. Critically, the participation in and promotion of safe CFM by fathers in households should be promoted, and motivating such behaviours might be achieved through focus on nurture as a motive.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据