Drinking Water Options in the Context of Arsenic Contamination

The purpose of this study was to assess the household’s choice on safe drinking water and safe water treatment technology conditional on the context of arsenic contamination in the Mekong Delta. Based on the Protection Motivation Theory, the study designed predictive model of As-poisoned-related health protective behaviour via a cognitive mediating process with threat and coping appraisals of intention action in choice on safe drinking water by household. Quantitatively, the study used methods of cost-effectiveness analysis and multi-criteria analysis to rank household’s preference of As mitigation technologies. Additionally, descriptive statistics analyses were also used to test household’s knowledge of arsenic and its health impacts. The choice of sampled areas was based on the previous secondary As-contamination well testing program. There were a total of 404 households, consisting of both tested and untested households interviewed in the survey. Results showed that unsafe groundwater was still used for drinking. The borax method and the treatment equipment were preferred choices, respectively. Household’s knowledge of As contamination was extremely bad and different depending on a household’s socio-economic and demographic factors and As-contaminated area. There were five factors affecting a household’s decision to use As treatment technology, namely, educational status, duration of residence, family size, knowledge of As, and ethnicity. In terms of cost-effectiveness, at a discount rate of 3% and a timeline of 10 years, the results showed that the costs per death averted or the costs per Disability-Adjusted Life Years Avoided saved by the sand filter and treatment equipment were 1.3 USD and 1.1 USD, respectively. This suggests that the treatment equipment method is a best choice for preventing As-related diseases. Finally, depending on what criteria are the top priority, the household water use preferences among water treatment methods will be different. The study proposed policy recommendations to improve safe water use and provision situation in the arsenic-contaminated areas such as launching a public awareness campaign, speeding the existing rural piped water program, promoting safe water treatment or arsenic treatment equipment, providing the information on the state of As contamination to the public, and seeking additional safe water sources such as rainwater and treated groundwater.