Research Paper Social outcomes of a community-based water, sanitation and hygiene intervention Rossanie Malolo, Save Kumwenda, Kondwani Chidziwisano, Christabel Kambala and Tracy Morse ABSTRACT Social benefits of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions are less documented compared to health benefits such as the reduction of diarrheal diseases. Although most decisions in WASH investments are based on potential health outcomes, interventions may also lead to social benefits, such as income generation, increased school enrollment, improved levels of dignity, self-esteem and civic pride, which can have a significant value both personally and to the wider community. This qualitative case study was used to assess the perceived social outcomes of purposively selected stakeholders from a WASH intervention study in Malawi. In-depth Interviews (n ¼ 10), focus group discussions (n ¼ 4) and key informants interviews (n ¼ 10) were conducted with caregivers (male and female), community leaders, traditional leaders and community coordinators. Thematic analysis identified eight social outcomes: formation and strengthening of relationships (n ¼ 32), becoming role models to community members (n ¼ 23), women empowerment (n ¼ 20), time-saving (n ¼ 17), change of status (n ¼ 12), receiving awards (n ¼ 12), reduced medical costs (n ¼ 11) and obtaining new skills (n ¼ 7). Social capital among caregivers was also found to be high. No negative outcomes from the intervention were reported. WASH interventions have multiple, important, but difficult to quantify social benefits which should be measured, reported and considered in WASH investment decision-making. Key words | community, hygiene, Malawi, sanitation, social outcomes, water HIGHLIGHTS • Cluster-based and community-led WASH interventions can lead to positive social impacts, particularly for primary caregivers. • Social benefits included improved relationships, role modeling, female empowerment, increased household funds, and skills development. • WASH and other development programs should consider and evaluate the social impact of interventions routinely. Rossanie Malolo (corresponding author) Save Kumwenda Kondwani Chidziwisano Christabel Kambala Tracy Morse Centre for Water, Sanitation, Health and Appropriate Technology Development (WASHTED), Polytechnic, University of Malawi, Private Bag 303, Chichiri, Blantyre, Malawi E-mail: rossaniedaudi@yahoo.com Save Kumwenda Kondwani Chidziwisano Christabel Kambala Department of Environmental Health, Polytechnic, University of Malawi, Private Bag 303, Chichiri, Blantyre, Malawi Kondwani Chidziwisano Tracy Morse Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Level 5 James Weir Building, Glasgow G1 1XQ, UK This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 483 Research Paper © 2021 The Authors Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development | 11.3 | 2021 doi: 10.2166/washdev.2021.264 Downloaded from http://iwaponline.com/washdev/article-pdf/11/3/483/889962/washdev0110483.pdf by guest on 23 September 2021