ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2024
Determinants of Willingness to Pay for Fecal Sludge Management Services and Knowledge Gaps: A Scoping Review.
Article in Environmental science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating the Health Belief Model and the Theory of Planned Behavior to Decode Willingness to Pay for Cancer Screening: Evidence From Community-Based Cross-Sectional Surveys in China.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Formal Manual Fecal Sludge Emptying and Transport Services: Cost Analysis of 23 Service Providers in Malawi and Uganda.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
- A compliance assessment tool for household pit latrines and cesspits against RS ISO 24521: evidence from Kigali City.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Review of Frameworks for Assessing the Strength of the Sanitation Economy and Investment Readiness.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- Determinants of Willingness to Pay for Fecal Sludge Management Services and Knowledge Gaps: A Scoping Review.Environmental science & technology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Achieving universal access to safely managed sanitation services is one of the Sustainable Development Goal 6 targets (SDG6.2). The cost and availability of services to ensure the safe management of on-site sanitation, such as pit latrines and septic tanks, can be major barriers for poor households. Particularly, fecal sludge emptying services have become increasingly important due to the growing urban population. This review aims to scope the literature on stated and revealed willingness to pay (WTP) for emptying on-site sanitation systems and to identify determinants of WTP and gaps in knowledge. We performed electronic searches of six databases. After deduplication, 1846 records were identified, of which 14 were included in the review. In these studies, we identified 26 distinct scenarios that reported mean or median WTP values for emptying services and their market price (i.e., price at which the services were provided). Among the 26 scenarios, 77% (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.