|
Field
Intervention (Public)
|
Before
First Experiment: Blind Test
The first experiment explores whether individuals prefer chlorinated water or filtered water. This experiment consists of a “blind test” between samples of chlorinated water and filtered water. Eligible population includes men and women aged 18 or more who are permanent residents of the villages. Each individual tests both a samples of filtered and chlorinated water, not knowing the types of water, and then indicates the preferred sample. Since, in Egypt, tea is an everyday beverage drank during meals, shared in social gatherings, and as an alternative to water during the day, the taste of tea made with clean water could affect people’s decision to adopt. We explore for this by randomly assigning half of the individuals in the blind test to taste plain water (both filtered and chlorinated) and the other half to taste tea (both made with filtered and chlorinated water). To avoid potential biases, we randomly assign the order in which individuals taste the samples.
Second Experiment: Willingess-to-Pay
In the second experiment we measure willingness to pay. This experiment focuses on women, who are typically the ones in charge of fetching water. We randomly assign half women to the treatment group (filtered water) and half to the control group (chlorinated water). After trying a sample of the water (all women try both plain water and tea), the woman states her willingness to pay for a 20-liter bucket of water. To obtain women’s willingness-to-pay, the woman first states an offer price for the 20 liters of water. Then a random transaction price is drawn (in our context choosing one envelope from an unmarked set). If the random transaction price is greater than the offer price, the woman cannot purchase the product. If the random price is less than or equal to the offer price, she has to purchase the product, and pays the random transaction price draw rather than the stated offer. For expected utility maximizers, the optimal strategy is to bid the true maximum willingness to pay (Becker, Degroot, and Marschak 1964).
Third experiment: Mechanisms
The third experiment explores underlying reasons behind the preferences revealed in the first experiment. However, filtered water is both healthier and tastier than chlorinated water, so the reasons for filtered water being preferred are not yet known. For this third experiment, we produce a new water that is as healthy as filtered water, but that taste as the local chlorinated water. That is, the two waters are equally healthy but differ in taste. Individuals are randomly assigned to taste either filtered (treatment) or chlorinated water (control) and, after tasting, are asked to describe the water in terms of its taste, health and cultural suitability (i.e. suitability to prepare traditional food and beverages). This allows us to identify the dimension(s) in which filtered water is superior to chlorinated water. On top of that, before tasting the water, we inform all participants that the water they will taste is healthy. In this way, we equalize actual information on health. Therefore, remaining differences in health perceptions can be attributed only to taste, which is the only signal about the quality of water that the individual receives after the disclosure of information.
Fourth Experiment: Health
In the fourth experiment, we randomly assign households to 3 groups: a treatment group, a control group, and a pure control group. The treatment group will receive a free voucher to obtain filtered water delivered at home for 2 months. The control group will receive a free voucher to obtain chlorinated water delivered at home for 2 months. Finally, the pure control group will not be offered any clean water. A follow-up visit will take place after 2 months, and we will survey household both in the treated and in the control group in order to record medium-term outcomes. In the medium term, there is a direct link between consumption of dirty water and diseases such as diarrhea and kidney problems. In addition, fetching clean water is time-and-labor-intensive, which could detract from education or productive activities, a burden that falls disproportionately on women and children. Lastly, since women are responsible for domestic water management (e.g., cleaning dishes, doing laundry, preparing food), they are usually blamed by their husbands for water-related issues, increasing the chances of intimate partner violence. That is, we will study the medium-term effect of clean-water adoption on water-related diseases, women’s working decisions, children’s education, and intimate partner violence.
|
After
First Experiment: Blind Test
The first experiment explores whether individuals prefer chlorinated water or filtered water. This experiment consists of a “blind test” between samples of chlorinated water and filtered water. Eligible population includes men and women aged 18 or more who are permanent residents of the villages. Each individual tests both a samples of filtered and chlorinated water, not knowing the types of water, and then indicates the preferred sample. Since, in Egypt, tea is an everyday beverage drank during meals, shared in social gatherings, and as an alternative to water during the day, the taste of tea made with clean water could affect people’s decision to adopt. We explore for this by randomly assigning half of the individuals in the blind test to taste plain water (both filtered and chlorinated) and the other half to taste tea (both made with filtered and chlorinated water). To avoid potential biases, we randomly assign the order in which individuals taste the samples.
Second Experiment: Willingess-to-Pay
In the second experiment we measure willingness to pay. This experiment focuses on women, who are typically the ones in charge of fetching water. We randomly assign half women to the treatment group (filtered water) and half to the control group (chlorinated water). After trying a sample of the water, the woman states her willingness to pay for a 20-liter bucket of water. To obtain women’s willingness-to-pay, the woman first states an offer price for the 20 liters of water. Then a random transaction price is drawn (in our context choosing one envelope from an unmarked set). If the random transaction price is greater than the offer price, the woman cannot purchase the product. If the random price is less than or equal to the offer price, she has to purchase the product, and pays the random transaction price draw rather than the stated offer. For expected utility maximizers, the optimal strategy is to bid the true maximum willingness to pay (Becker, Degroot, and Marschak 1964).
Third experiment: Mechanisms
The third experiment explores underlying reasons behind the preferences revealed in the first experiment. However, filtered water is both healthier and tastier than chlorinated water, so the reasons for filtered water being preferred are not yet known. For this third experiment, we produce a new water that is as healthy as filtered water, but that taste as the local chlorinated water. That is, the two waters are equally healthy but differ in taste. Individuals are randomly assigned to taste either filtered (treatment) or chlorinated water (control) and, after tasting, are asked to describe the water in terms of its taste, health and cultural suitability (i.e. suitability to prepare traditional food and beverages). This allows us to identify the dimension(s) in which filtered water is superior to chlorinated water. On top of that, before tasting the water, we inform all participants that the water they will taste is healthy. In this way, we equalize actual information on health. Therefore, remaining differences in health perceptions can be attributed only to taste, which is the only signal about the quality of water that the individual receives after the disclosure of information.
Fourth Experiment: Health
In the fourth experiment, we randomly assign households to 3 groups: a treatment group, a control group, and a pure control group. The treatment group will receive a free voucher to obtain filtered water delivered at home for 2 months. The control group will receive a free voucher to obtain chlorinated water delivered at home for 2 months. Finally, the pure control group will not be offered any clean water. A follow-up visit will take place after 2 months, and we will survey household both in the treated and in the control group in order to record medium-term outcomes. In the medium term, there is a direct link between consumption of dirty water and diseases such as diarrhea and kidney problems. In addition, fetching clean water is time-and-labor-intensive, which could detract from education or productive activities, a burden that falls disproportionately on women and children. Lastly, since women are responsible for domestic water management (e.g., cleaning dishes, doing laundry, preparing food), they are usually blamed by their husbands for water-related issues, increasing the chances of intimate partner violence. That is, we will study the medium-term effect of clean-water adoption on water-related diseases, women’s working decisions, children’s education, and intimate partner violence.
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (Explanation)
|
Before
A) Preference for chlorinated and filtered water (or tea)
- Which sample did you prefer?
(Enumerator indicates the cups and understand which water sample the respondent preferred. 1 = Chlorinated; 2 = Filtered; 3 = Both; 4 = Neither)
B) Health, taste and tradition perceptions
- On a scale from 1 to 5, how much do you think this water/tea is tasty, where 1 is very bad tasting and 5 is extremely tasty?
- On a scale from 1 to 5, how much do you think this water/tea is healthy, where 1 is extremely unhealthy and 5 is extremely health?
- On a scale from 1 to 5, how much do you think the color of this water/tea looks good, where 1 is "looks extremely bad" and 5 is "looks extremely good"?
- On a scale from 1 to 5, how much do you think this water/tea is suitable to prepare your traditional drinks (e.g. tea) and cook your traditional dishes, where 1 is extremely unsuitable and 5 is extremely suitable?
C) Willingness-to-pay and adoption
Becker, Degroot, and Marschak (1964) procedure
|
After
A) Preference for chlorinated and filtered water (or tea)
- Which sample did you prefer?
(Enumerator indicates the cups and understand which water sample the respondent preferred. 1 = Chlorinated; 2 = Filtered; 3 = Both; 4 = Neither)
B) Health, taste and tradition perceptions
- On a scale from 1 to 5, how much do you think this water is tasty, where 1 is very bad tasting and 5 is extremely tasty?
- On a scale from 1 to 5, how much do you think this water is healthy, where 1 is extremely unhealthy and 5 is extremely health?
- On a scale from 1 to 5, how much do you think the color of this water looks good, where 1 is "looks extremely bad" and 5 is "looks extremely good"?
- On a scale from 1 to 5, how much do you think this water is suitable to prepare your traditional drinks (e.g. tea) and cook your traditional dishes, where 1 is extremely unsuitable and 5 is extremely suitable?
C) Willingness-to-pay and adoption
Becker, Degroot, and Marschak (1964) procedure
|
|
Field
Experimental Design (Public)
|
Before
First experiment (blind test), second experiment (willingness-to-pay) and third experiment (mechanisms): The first three experiments are conducted in the same 8 villages in rural Upper Egypt. We propose a randomized design at the individual level, stratified by village. We recruit different individuals for each experiment. In the first and third experiment, we recruit individuals in the village aged 18 or more. In the second experiment, the respondent will be the woman in charge of the household, who is typically the one that fetches water.
In the first experiment, we randomly assign half of the sample to taste both filtered and chlorinated water (n=100), and the other half to taste both filtered and chlorinated tea (n=100). Additionally, to avoid potential biases related to the order of testing the samples, within each treatment arm, half of the individuals are randomly assigned to taste chlorinated water first and the other half to taste filtered water first.
In the second experiment, half of the sample (n=200) is randomly assigned to the treatment group (taste filtered water and elicit willingess-to-pay) and half (n=200) to the control group (taste chlorinated water and elicit willingess-to-pay).
In the third experiment, half of the sample (n=100) is randomly assigned to taste filtered water (treated group) and half (n=100) chlorinated water (control group). In each of the three experiments, we will administer the treatment followed by the related survey measures.
Fourth experiment (health): It is conducted in the same 8 villages in rural Upper Egypt. We propose a randomized design at the household level, stratified by village. We randomly assign househols to 3 groups: a treatment group (n=700), a control group (n=700), and a pure control group (n=700). We conduct a survey after 2 months from the intervention.
|
After
First experiment (blind test), second experiment (willingness-to-pay) and third experiment (mechanisms): The first three experiments are conducted in the same 7 villages in rural Upper Egypt. We propose a randomized design at the individual level, stratified by village. We recruit different individuals for each experiment. In the first and third experiment, we recruit individuals in the village aged 18 or more. In the second experiment, the respondent will be the woman in charge of the household, who is typically the one that fetches water.
In the first experiment, we randomly assign half of the sample to taste both filtered and chlorinated water (n=100), and the other half to taste both filtered and chlorinated tea (n=100). Additionally, to avoid potential biases related to the order of testing the samples, within each treatment arm, half of the individuals are randomly assigned to taste chlorinated water first and the other half to taste filtered water first.
In the second experiment, half of the sample (n=200) is randomly assigned to the treatment group (taste filtered water and elicit willingess-to-pay) and half (n=200) to the control group (taste chlorinated water and elicit willingess-to-pay).
In the third experiment, half of the sample (n=100) is randomly assigned to taste filtered water (treated group) and half (n=100) chlorinated water (control group). In each of the three experiments, we will administer the treatment followed by the related survey measures.
Fourth experiment (health): It is conducted in the same 7 villages in rural Upper Egypt. We propose a randomized design at the household level, stratified by village. We randomly assign househols to 3 groups: a treatment group (n=700), a control group (n=700), and a pure control group (n=700). We conduct a survey after 2 months from the intervention.
|