Marco Conceptual

Homa Bay Kisii Ndhiwa Oyugis Suneka Masaba

n = 987 (%) n = 880 (%) n 467 (%) n = 520 (%) n = 44 0 (%) n = 440 (%) ROOF

Grass 808 (81.9) 482 (54.8) 420 (89.9) 388 (74.6) 2 6 8 (60.9 ) 2 14 (48.6) Iron sheets 179 ( 1 8 . 1) 398 (45.2) 47 ( 1 0 . 1) 132 (25.4) 172 (39.1 ) 2 2 6 ( 5 L 4 ) WALL

Mud & w ood 910 (92.2) 797 (90.6) 411 (94.4) 469 (90.2) 4 2 2 ( 9 5 4 ) 375 (85.2) Cement 77 (7.8) 83 ( 9 4 ) 26 ( 5 ^ ) 51 (9.8) 18 (4.1) 65 (14.8) FLOOR

Mud 935 (94.7) 781 (88.8) 464 (99.4) 471 (90.6) 4 2 2 ( 9 5 4 ) 3 59 ( 8 1 6 ) Cement 52 ( 5 3 ) 99 ( 1 1.2) 3 (&6) 49 (9.4) 18 (4.1) 81 (18.4)

Household refuse disposal

Traditional methods of disposing faecal waste was by open daefication in the bush. Over the years use of latrines has become widely practiced as part of either modernization process or improved economic status. Out o f 1867 households surveyed, 72% had latrines, in Kisii, the proportion of households with latrines were 96% compared to 51% in Homa Bay. The difference between the two districts in the presence o f latrines could

be attributed to: (i) adaptation to changes in the physical environment, particularly in Kisii where all the natural bushes have been pulled down by the highly dense population, (517 persons per square kilometre) hence the need to construct latrines; and (ii) increased awareness to construct and use latrines in Kisii. Presence and use o f compost pit for disposition o f household waste was also higher (60.9%) in Kisii than in Homa Bay (46%). Methods o f disposing o f human and household waste in the two districts is shown in table 6.24.

Domestic water supply

In rural communities where piped water is generally lacking, the source o f water for domestic use depends on the season o f the year i.e. whether rainy or dry. The study was conducted during rainy season and therefore, a number o f households - 690 (37%) indicated that roof catchment was their main source o f water. In general, about 51% of households in Kisii obtained water from protected sources compared to only 37% (table 6.24). Stream/river and spring/well together formed the main sources o f water for domestic use, 420 (47.7%) in Kisii and 433 (43.9%) in Homa Bay. Ponds/dams were used by 186 (18.8%) households in Homa Bay and only 12 (1.4%) in Kisii (see also section 2.2.2).

Boiling water was the commonest method o f treating water before use. About 51% o f households in Homa Bay were boiling water compared to 29% in Kisii. Coagulation method (use o f sodium bicarbonate to settle solute) was more common (35.6%) in Kisii than in Homa Bay (24.9%). About 33% households in Kisii and 19% in Homa Bay indicated that they do not treat water before use (table 6.24).

Table 6.24: Distribution of households by methods of waste disposal and water supply PRACTICE N Y A N Z A HO M A B A Y KISII LATRINE Present 499 (50.6) Absent 488 (49.4) CHILD W A ST E D ISPO SA L Hygienic" 631 (63.9) Unhygienic*’ 356 (36.1) H O U S E H O L D W A STE DIS PO SA L Hygienic ’’ 719 (72.8) Unhygienic"* 268 (27.2) WATE R SUPPLY Protected' 368 (37.3) Unprotected*^ 619 (62.7) T R E A T M E N T OF WA TER Chlorinated 46 (4.7) Boiling 506 (51.3) Coagulation® 246 (24.9) None 189 (19.1)

Hom a B ay Kisii Ndhiwa n = 9 87 (%) n = 880 (%) n = 467 (%)

840 ( 9 5 j ) 4 0 (4.5)

O yugis Suneka Masaba n = 520 (%) n = 4 4 0 (%) n = 4 4 0 (%) 827 (94.0) 53 (&0) 632 (7E 8) 248 (2&2) 4 48 (50.9 ) 4 3 2 (49.1) 30 (3.4) 251 (28.5) 313 (35.6) 286 (32.5) 87 (18.6) 4 1 2 (79.2) 406 (92.3) 4 34 (98 6) 380 (81.4) 108 (20.6) 34 (7.7) 6 (1.4) 140 (30.0) 491 (94.4) 4 00 (90 9) 4 27 (97.0) 327 (70.0) 29 (5.6) 40 (9 .1) 13 (3.0) 354 (75.8) 365 (70.2) 2 16 (49.1) 4 1 6 (94.5) 113 (24.2) 155 (29.8) 224 (50.9) 24 (5.5) 108 (23.1) 2 6 0 (50 0) 214 (48.6) 234 (53.2) 359 (76 9) 260 (50 0) 226 (51.4) 206 (46.8) 29 (6.2) 17 (3.3) 18 (4.1) 12 (2.7) 182 (39.0) 3 24 (62.3) 46 (10.5) 2 05 (46.6) 186 (39.8 60 ( 1 1.5) 192 (43.6) 121 (27.5) 70 (15.0) 119 (22.9) 184 (41.8) 102 (23.2)

U se napkins, th ro w in the la trin e or bu ry in the soil; ^ Throw in the bush; ^ U se co m p o st p it, b u ry in so il or burn; ^ T hrow ing in discrim in ately; ^ R o o f catchm ent, p ip e d o r b o re hole; f Spring, riv e r o r p o n d ; S S ed im en ta tio n o f so lu te b y u sin g sodiu m bicarbonate.

6.7 HOUSEHOLD PROPERTY OWNERSHIP

The property owned by the households recruited in the study were of two categories, those universally available in all households like beds, chairs, tables and eating utensils; and those which were available in only some of them. Radio and other household property like farm implements, like wheel burrow, ox-plough and ox-cart; means of transport like bicycles, motorcycles (very few); for generating income like sewing machine; and those for domestic

use like sofa set and pressure lamps, were available in a few households only. Distribution of these property by household is shown in table 6.25.

Table 6.25: Proportion of households which owned the selected property

N Y A N Z A HOMA BAY KISII

PROPERTY Homa Bay Kisii Ndhiwa Oyugis Suneka Masaba

Radio 507 (51.4) 50 0 (56.8) 2 17 (46.5) 2 90 (55.8) 209 (47.5) 291 (66.1) Cupboard 442 (45.7) 501 (54.3) 157 (33.6) 267 (5'l.0) 152 (34.3) 349 (79.3) Ox-plough 365 (37.0) 184 (20.9) 2 2 6 (48.4) 139 (26.7) 116 (26.4) 68 (15.5) Bicycle 313 (31.7) 143 (16.8) 166 ( 3 5 j ) 147 (28.3) 107 (24.3) 41 (9.3) Pressure lamp 236 (23.9) 118 (13.4) I I I (23.8) 125 (24.0) 55 (1 2.5) 63 (14.3) Wheel burrow 146 (14.8) 112 (12.7) 50 (10.7) 96 (18.5) 40 (9.1) 72 (16.4) Sofa set 131 (13.3) 76 ^1^0 47 (1 0.0) 84 (16.2) 25 (5.7) 51 (11.6) Sewing machine 95 (9.6) 50 (5.7) 38 ( 8 4 ) 57 (11.0) 25 (5 7) 25 (5.7) Ox-cart 56 ( 5 J ) 14 (1.6) 46 (9.9) 10 (1.9) I (0.2) 13 (3.0)

Household property listed in table 6.25 show that Homa Bay was better placed than Kisii. However the fact is that they are “status symbol” particularly for residents (the Luo) in Homa Bay. The labour out-migrants (table 6 .6 ) in urban areas (figures 1.3 and 6 .8) they

would endeavour to use the meagre income they get to buy prestigious items like radio, sofa set, pressure lamps, ox-plough and wheel burrows as a sign of modernization. Bicycle, however, is a more convenient mode of transport in Homa Bay than Kisii which is very hilly. Sewing machine was more common in Oyugis because there are tailoring classes in Oyugis urban centre and those trained tend to buy their own machines.

In summary use o f more expensive iron sheets for roofing residential houses means that households have higher economic status the those in Homa Bay. But it could also be due to difficulty in getting grass for thatching the roofs. Presence of latrine, 98.6% in Masaba

compared to 18.6% in Ndhiwa and its use, particularly for disposal o f child faecal matter, show the high level o f awareness about environmental sanitation. Presence o f latrines in Kisii could also have been influenced by lack o f bushes and fields for open daefication.

The “essential” household property like beds, chairs, tables and cooking and eating utensils were available in every household. Other household property, were available to only those who could afford them or those who wanted to indicate that they are modem. Ownership of radio was the highest, next to the essential household property.