Analysis of the politics and economics for sanitation delivery in informal settlements (Kenya)

The Sustainable Development Goals agenda 6.2 aims to increase access to sanitation by 2030. However, upscaling and improving sanitation in slums has been a challenge. This study investigated the role of actors, technologies and installation process, and the gap between policy and practice in sanitation delivery. The study used a convergent research design and a mixed-methods approach to collect data from 100 household heads and 52 key informants. The qualitative and quantitative data were analysed thematically, descriptively, and inferentially in Nvivo 12 and SPSS. Results showed that 40% of respondents used pit latrine while 2% used a composting toilet. In emptying, transporting and treatment of excreta, 34% used buckets, 12% sewer systems, 39% de-sludged in open grounds and 10 % disposed in landfills. Type of sanitation technology (F (3, 96) = 8.497, p < .05), and the construction and installation process (F (3, 96) = 20.379, p < .05) significantly influenced accessibility, availability, affordability and accessibility. The type of toilets and construction and installation process significantly predicted accessibility, availability, affordability and accountability. 47% of respondents indicated landlords as the providers of the toilets, whereas only 5% mentioned County government. 68.0% attributed the siting of toilets to landlords, with only 2.0% indicating the user’s involvement. Although landlords were willing to provide safe sanitation options, a cost of KS. 5000 for sewer connections was expensive. Respondents (29%) indicated that sanitation provision was adequately coordinated by institutions. Regarding financing options, 31.0% mentioned loans while 4.0% indicated taxes/public funding. Regulatory framework for sanitation had an insignificant positive relationship with availability (r=.103, p=.308). This study concluded the type of sanitation technology and the construction/installation process predicted affordability, accessibility and availability. The governance for sanitation delivery was inadequate and fragmented. There were gaps between the sanitation practices and the implementation of the provisions of sanitation policies. The study recommends an innovative and appropriate type of sanitation technologies. Two levels of governments should strategize to formalize and regulate informal and formal sanitation services. Stakeholders must review and harmonize sanitation policies and acts to identify gaps and inconsistencies.