Authors : Kirui Bernard; Wandili Sarah; Gachoka Kennedy

Volume/Issue : Volume 9 - 2024, Issue 8 - August

Google Scholar : https://shorturl.at/ApYxV

Scribd : https://shorturl.at/fmh3n

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24AUG1375

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : In 2020, over half of the world's population resided in cities, with projections indicating that by 2050, this figure will rise to 70%. Providing adequate sanitation services in urban and peri-urban areas presents significant challenges due to the dense concentration of people, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Poor sanitation practices in these areas can lead to the spread of diseases with high morbidity and mortality rates. The focus of the study was on Kericho town, Kenya, facing a notable sanitation challenge due to dilapidated sewer system and inadequate sanitation facilities . The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of sanitation technologies used in Kericho Town. Descriptive study design was adopted. Data collection methods included surveys, interviews, and observations, with a sample size of 409 households. The findings revealed that 66.5% of the population relies on pit latrines with slabs, 13.69% use pour/manual flush systems, 11.49% have ventilated improved pit latrines, 8.07% employ automatic cistern flush, and a minimal 0.24% practice open defecation. 25% of population discharged waste directly into the sewerage system whereby 5% were considered safely managed. Additionally, 4% of waste from user interfaces was discharged directly into open ground or open drains. 2% of population used septic tanks connected to soak pits, whereas 6% of population used septic tanks connected to open ground. Sludge from septic tanks, comprising 20%, was delivered to the WWTP by exhausters for further treatment, of which only 20% underwent treatment, with the remainder released untreated into the environment. 49% of the population used lined pits, while 14% used unlined pits. Approximately 20% of faecal sludge from the pits was exhausted, with only 20% of it considered safely treated, and the remainder released into the environment. Notably, open defecation accounted for less than 1% based on the survey findings. Consequently, the current trend in faecal sludge management in Kericho Town posed potential health hazards to the community unless measures such as rehabilitating the existing wastewater treatment plant are implemented.

Keywords : Safely Managed, Sanitation Technologies, Urbanization, Faecal Sludge.

References :

1. Africanews. (2023). Nairobi River sewage and industrial pollution seeps into food and water.
2. Brandão, J., Albergaria, I., Albuquerque, J., José, S., Grossinho, J., Ferreira, F. C., Raposo, A., Rodrigues, R., Silva, C., Jordao, L., Sousa, M., Rebelo, M. H., Veríssimo, C., Sabino, R., Amaro, T., Cardoso, F., Patrão-Costa, M., & Solo-Gabriele, H. (2020). Untreated sewage contamination of beach sand from a leaking underground sewage system. Science of The Total Environment, 740, 140237. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140237
3. CGoK. (2017). Intergrated Strategic Urban Development Plan (ISUDP) 2017-2037.
4. Evans, B., & Saywell, D. (2006). Sanitation 21: Simple Approaches to Complex Sanitation-A Draft Framework for Analysis.
5. Gambrill, M., Gilsdorf, R. J., & Kotwal, N. (2020). Citywide inclusive sanitation—business as unusual: shifting the paradigm by shifting minds. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 201.
6. Israel, G. D. (1992). Determining Sample Size. The Level of Precision. https://www.academia.edu/21353552/Determining_Sample_Size_1
7. KNBS. (2019). Distribution of Population by Administrative Units.
8. Lüthi, C., Willetts, J., & Hoffmann, S. (2020). City-wide sanitation: the urban sustainability challenge. In (Vol. 8, pp. 585418): Frontiers Media SA.
9. Muruganandam, M., Rajamanickam, S., Sivarethinamohan, S., Reddy, M. K., Velusamy, P., Gomathi, R., Ravindiran, G., Gurugubelli, T. R., & Munisamy, S. K. (2023). Impact of climate change and anthropogenic activities on aquatic ecosystem–A review. Environmental Research, 117233.
10. NEMA, N. E. M. A. (2006). ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND CO-ORDINATION (WATER QUALITY) REGULATIONS, 2006
11. NEMA, N. E. M. A. (2019). Polluters of Nairobi River prosecuted. Retrieved 20th November from
12. Odeya, L. (2023). An Analysis of Sanitation in the Lake Victoria Basin in Kenya (Lake Victoria Basin Lake-wide Inclusive Sanitation (LWIS), Issue.
13. Okurut, K., Kulabako, R. N., Chenoweth, J., & Charles, K. (2015). Assessing demand for improved sustainable sanitation in low-income informal settlements of urban areas: a critical review. International Journal of Environmental Health Research, 25(1), 81-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/09603123.2014.893570
14. Pickford, J. (2016). Excreta Flow Diagrams for Urban Environments. Waterlines. Sanitation Matters, 35(3), 267-280. https://doi.org/10.3362/1756-3488.2016.026
15. UN, N., United. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
16. WB. (2020). Urban Development. World Bank Retrieved 20th September from https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/overview
17. WHO, W. H. O. (2015). Water sanitation & hygiene for accelerating and sustaining progress on neglected tropical diseases: a global strategy 2015-2020.
18. WHO, W. H. O. (2019). Guidelines for safe uidelines for safe recreational water environments.
19. WHO/UNICEF. (2017). Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene: 2017 Update and SDG Baselines.