Environment, Development and Sustainability

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04481-0

Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

Ftimbé Laré1 · Seyram K. Sossou1 · Yacouba Konaté1

Received: 22 July 2023 / Accepted: 7 January 2024

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2024

Abstract
Toilet-linked anaerobic digesters (TLADs), commonly called biogas toilets, are integral
to ecological sanitation technologies implemented in Burkina Faso for over a decade to
improve the population’s living conditions. However, the adoption of TLADs is low, and
there is an incomplete understanding of the barriers hindering their dissemination within
the community. Therefore, this study aims to provide initial insights into the determinants
and constraints associated with adopting TLADs within rural households in Burkina Faso.
From December 2022 to January 2023, data on household characteristics and their per-
ception of TLAD were collected through a survey of 147 rural households, of which 76
are equipped with TLAD. Respondents were selected using a combination of simple ran-
dom sampling and systematic sampling methods in the provinces of Burkina Faso, with
a substantial number of TLADs constructed. Descriptive statistical methods, Fisher test,
t-test, and regression analysis with marginal effects were employed to analyse the data. The
study results reveal that all surveyed rural households (100%) positively perceive TLADs
and their by-products. Additionally, there are significant mean differences between TLAD
owners and non-owner households regarding pig farming and subsidy access. Regression
analysis highlights the significant positive influence of access to subsidy on TLAD adop-
tion. Conversely, water purchase has a significant negative influence on TLAD adoption.
Furthermore, TLADs positively impact household health, environment, and finances by
reducing traditional fuel consumption. The main constraints to TLAD adoption primarily
revolve around the lack of financial resources needed for TLAD acquisition, limited access
to water and household organic waste, technical limitations related to TLAD construction,
and the inefficiency of communication strategies. The findings of this study lay the foun-
dations for a deeper understanding of the factors that promote or hinder the adoption of
TLADs in Burkina Faso and could contribute to the development of more appropriate poli-
cies and measures aimed at promoting the adoption of TLADs within rural households.

Keywords Toilet-linked anaerobic digester · Adoption · Biogas · Rural households ·

Burkina Faso

Extended author information available on the last page of the article

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 F. Laré et al.

1 Introduction

Properly managing human excreta is paramount for the health and well-being of popula-
tions (Budge et al., 2022). Despite the acknowledgement of sanitation as a fundamental
human right by United Nations Resolution 64/292 in 2010, 3.6 billion individuals world-
wide still lack access to safely managed sanitation facilities. Among these individuals,
494 million continue to practice open defecation, with nearly 92% residing in rural areas
(WHO/UNICEF, 2021). Open defecation results in adverse environmental consequences
due to pathogens’ contamination of water bodies, soils, and food sources (Gizaw et al.,
2022), thereby facilitating the transmission of diarrheal diseases. Diarrheal diseases signifi-
cantly contribute to global child mortality, resulting in approximately 525,000 child deaths
under the age of five each year (WHO, 2017).
Many sub-Saharan African countries have prioritised establishing household-level sani-
tation facilities to combat open defecation and contribute to achieving Sustainable Devel-
opment Goal 6 (SDG 6). Recent efforts have focused on ecological sanitation (ecosan)
technologies, which treat faecal matter at the source while allowing the recovery of energy
and nutrient resources (Werkneh & Gebru, 2023). According to Lima et al. (2022), a
resource-oriented sanitation model promotes more effective use of sanitation facilities and
enhances hygiene practices. Ecosan is, therefore, considered the most promising alterna-
tive for addressing sanitation challenges (KC et al., 2020). Various ecosan technologies
have recently been implemented in rural areas of Burkina Faso to address sanitation needs
while contributing to food security (Dickin et al., 2018). These technologies include urine-
diverting dry toilets (Dickin et al., 2018), composting toilets (Sou/Dakoure et al., 2019),
and toilet-linked anaerobic digesters (TLAD) (Hien, 2017).
The TLADs, commonly known as biogas toilets, are sanitation systems that produce
biogas from the anaerobic digestion of human excreta and other biodegradable organic
waste (Boyd Williams et al., 2022a, 2022b). TLADs have been introduced in rural areas
of Burkina Faso through the National Biodigester Program of Burkina Faso (PNB-BF), a
program primarily dedicated to the promotion of domestic biogas digesters (Hien, 2017;
PNB-BF, 2016). Since its inception in 2009, approximately 16,140 domestic biogas digest-
ers have been installed (PNB-BF, 2023), making Burkina Faso one of the leading Afri-
can countries in the dissemination of biogas technology (Uhunamure et al., 2021). These
domestic biogas digesters are typically fed with cow dung and pig slurry. However, house-
holds can connect their latrines to the biodigester for sanitation purposes (Hien, 2017).
This connection enhances sanitation and may increase biogas production (Boyd Williams
et al., 2022a, 2022b).
TLADs offer several advantages to households. They serve as improved sanitation
facilities while providing clean fuel (biogas) and high-quality organic fertiliser (digestate)
(Boyd Williams et al., 2022a, 2022b; Somorin, 2020). By recovering energy and nutrients
from human waste, TLADs contribute to a circular economy (Duan et al., 2020). By treat-
ing and converting faecal matter into a safe product, TLADs also significantly mitigate
the adverse effects of improper human waste disposal and handling (Cheng. et al., 2018).
Therefore, TLADs are considered hygienic and environmentally friendly sanitation solu-
tions (Bauza et al., 2023).
Despite the additional services offered by toilet connections, the adoption of TLADs
is much lower globally than domestic dung-fed anaerobic digesters (Boyd Williams et al.,
2022a, 2022b; Smith et al., 2011). This has been attributed to limited awareness and
knowledge of the technology, combined with sociocultural aspects surrounding human

13
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

waste (Boyd Williams, Quilliam, Campbell, Ghatani. These socio-cultural aspects include
religion, culture, beliefs, household needs, and preferences (Schouten & Mathenge, 2010).
Previous studies on user adoption of alternative toilets have employed the Theory of
Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1991; Osei-Marfo et al., 2022) or the Innovation Diffusion
Model (Banamwana et al., 2022b; Rogers, 2003) to emphasise the importance of social
norms, beliefs, and hygiene practices on perceptions of ecosan technologies like TLADs.
These studies have shown that households’ intention or decision to adopt TLADs can be
influenced by their attitude toward TLADs, societal norms, and their perception of the ease
or difficulty of installing, using, and maintaining TLADs (Osei-Marfo et al., 2022). Asmal
et al. (2022), examining the impact of people’s attitudes towards greywater management in
coastal slums, have indicated that households’ perception of waste significantly influences
their attitudes or actions regarding that waste. For instance, a study conducted in Ghana
demonstrated that some individuals are reluctant to use human waste for biogas produc-
tion and the resulting digested sludge as a source of fertiliser because they perceive it as
contaminated (Osei-Marfo et al., 2018). In Kenya, some communities living in Nairobi’s
slums have concerns about the safety of TLAD installations due to the significant risk of
fires that may occur in the event of gas leaks (Gitau et al., 2022). Such negative perceptions
can hinder the smooth diffusion of TLADs in various geographic contexts (Banamwana
et al., 2022b).
Several studies have also highlighted how individuals’ cultural preferences can lead to
resistance to adopting TLADs. For example, in Rwanda, some people prefer to stick with
traditional pit latrines because of their familiarity, ease of construction, and lower cost than
ecosan systems (Sangwa et al., 2023). Similarly, in India, open defecation persists in spe-
cific communities because it is considered an integral part of their cultural identity. In these
contexts, open defecation is perceived as a cost-free option compared to building latrines,
which is expensive and requires adjustments in one’s environmental identity and values
(Leong, 2020). Thus, social perception is crucial in successfully implementing new sanita-
tion technologies (Eom et al., 2021; Osei-Marfo et al., 2022). However, socio-economic
and demographic factors also contribute significantly to this dynamic.
The literature suggests that individual characteristics, such as age, level of education,
household income, place of residence as well as access to credit and access to electronic
media, are likely to influence the adoption of ecosan technologies (Boyd Williams et al.,
2022a, 2022b; Osumanu & Amin, 2023; Shallo et al., 2020). A study in India consistently
shows that older rural households with higher education, higher income, and better access
to information and essential resources like water and organic waste are more likely to adopt
ecosan systems (Ali & Khan, 2023). For instance, several studies have shown that the ini-
tial cost of TLAD installation can be prohibitive for many low-income rural families (Ami-
gun et al., 2012; Banamwana et al., 2022a; Gitau et al., 2022). Thus, access to credit is
critical in enhancing poor households’ affordability of biogas technology adoption (Shallo
et al., 2020). The low adoption of TLADs is, therefore, the result of a complex combination
of socio-cultural, socio-economic, and demographic factors.
In Burkina Faso, the adoption and performance of TLADs are not well-documented.
It is known that the rate of toilet connection to biodigesters is low, representing less than
10% of the total biodigesters installed (PNB-BF, 2016). To date, no research in Burkina
Faso has explored what motivated current TLAD users to adopt them or what perceived
benefits and challenges are associated with these toilets. To address this gap, this study
surveyed 147 rural households in five provinces of Burkina Faso. This survey is the first
large-scale study conducted in Burkina Faso to investigate the adoption of TLADs since
their introduction.

13
 F. Laré et al.

This paper seeks to contribute to a better understanding of the drivers and barriers to
the TLAD adoption process in the context of Burkina Faso. Specifically, our objectives
were to determine 1) the factors influencing households’ decisions to adopt TLADs, 2) the
impacts of TLAD use on the households, and 3) the constraints and challenges associated
with TLAD adoption.

2 Background

2.1 The context of Burkina Faso

Burkina Faso, a landlocked Sahelian country located in West Africa, spans an area of
274,200 ­km2 (Englebert, 2019). It is divided into 13 administrative regions with 45 prov-
inces. The population of Burkina Faso is estimated at 20.2 million inhabitants, with an
average of 6.5 persons per household. The majority of the population is rural (74.3%),
young (53.4%), and predominantly female (51.8%) (INSD, 2021b).
The climate of Burkina Faso is tropical, characterised by two distinct seasons: a dry sea-
son from mid-October to April and a rainy season from May to mid-October. The average
annual rainfall in Burkina Faso is low, irregular, and unevenly distributed across the terri-
tory, ranging from 300 mm in the northern regions to 1,200 mm in the southern regions
(INSD, 2021b).
Burkina Faso, with over 60 ethnic groups, exhibits significant cultural diversity. Each
group preserves specific cultural values and practices, although commonalities can be
observed nationally, partly influenced by history and internal migrations. While notable
differences persist in architecture and habitat, the strict regional separation is no longer
as apparent. The major ethnic groups include the Mossi, representing 50.2% of Burkina’s
population, and the Peul, Bobo, Lobi-Dagari, Mandé, and Sénoufo. Over 50% of the popu-
lation practices animism, while other religions, such as Christianity and Islam, are also
present (Englebert, 2019; GTZ, 2007).
The economy of Burkina Faso is primarily based on agriculture, employing nearly
75% of the active population and contributing to 28.7% of the Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) (INSD, 2021b). Agricultural production, mainly family-oriented and rain-depend-
ent, focuses on cereals, cotton, and livestock (Hien, 2017). Despite a per capita GDP of
US$726 (INSD, 2021a), nearly 36.2% of Burkina Faso’s population still lives below the
poverty threshold of US$1 per day (INSD, 2022), particularly affecting rural populations.
Access to safe drinking water remains a challenge, especially for rural populations in
Burkina Faso. Despite significant efforts, approximately 47% of the population has access
to essential drinking water services, a rate that drops to around 33% in rural areas (WHO/
UNICEF, 2021). Access to sanitation is also limited, with only 13% of rural inhabitants
using improved sanitary facilities, while nearly 55% still practice open defecation (WHO/
UNICEF, 2021).
The current energy situation in the country requires a shift from a predominant
dependence on traditional biomass to more sustainable solutions. Over 90% of house-
holds primarily rely on biomass, such as firewood and charcoal, as their primary energy
source (PANER, 2015), and only 33.32% of the population has access to electricity
(LPSE, 2016). The demand for firewood is increasing by 2.2% annually, leading to a
deforestation rate of 0.83% of natural forests per year, approximately 105,000 hectares

13
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

annually (Hien, 2017). In such a context, the biodigester has proven to be an attractive
and suitable technology for Burkina Faso.

2.2 Biogas in Burkina Faso

The biogas technology was introduced in Burkina Faso in the 1970s–1980s (Thery
et al., 1981). However, widespread adoption only occurred with the implementation of
the National Biodigester Program of Burkina Faso (PNB-BF) under the Africa Biogas
Partnership Programme (ABPP) in 2009 (Obileke et al., 2021). Figure 1 illustrates the
evolution of biodigester technology in Burkina Faso.
Previously, in 2007, a feasibility study conducted in Burkina Faso by the GIZ (Ger-
man Development Cooperation), formerly known as GTZ, in collaboration with the
SNV (Netherlands Development Organisation), concluded that there was a technical
potential for 500,000–1,000,000 biodigesters at the national level (GTZ, 2007).
The PNB-BF, resulting from a partnership between SNV, Humanist Institute for
Development Cooperation (HIVOS), and the State of Burkina Faso, operates under the
auspices of the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal and Fish Resources. It aims to improve
living conditions, increase access to clean energy and agricultural productivity, and
create green jobs by creating a viable, market-oriented, multi-actor sector to construct
domestic biodigesters.
The government of Burkina Faso, through the PNB-BF, supports the large-scale
promotion of this technology in line with its National Sustainable Development Policy
(PNDD, 2013–2050), aiming to improve the level and quality of life for populations,
especially the poorest, and promote sustainable production and consumption practices.
The country aims to deploy 75,000 biodigesters by 2030 (Hien, 2017). Although the
adoption of biogas technology has increased in Burkina Faso, the country still faces
some challenges in its widespread diffusion, as only 15,975 have been built to date
(PNB-BF, 2023).

2009
2008 Launch of PNB-BF
Launch of ABPP Promotion of
2007 (African Biogas biodigesters in
Feasibility Study for a Partnership Program) Burkina Faso.
National Domestic Purpose: support the
1970-1980 Biogas Programme in introduction of
Burkina Faso biodigesters in 6
Introduction of
biodigesters in Potential of countries, including
Burkina Faso. biodigesters: 100,000 Burkina Faso.
to 500,000.

Fig. 1  History of biodigesters in Burkina Faso. Source: Compiled by authors

13
 F. Laré et al.

3 Methodology

3.1 Study area

The study was conducted in five provinces of Burkina Faso (Fig. 2), with a significant
number of biodigesters installed. These study sites were selected due to the prevalence
of installed TLADs, which was informed by using the data provided by the PNB-BF.
Without available provincial-scale data, Table 1 compares the regions where the studied
provinces belong with other regions across several categories. The Province of Ganzo-
urgou is situated in the Plateau Central Region. In this area, the proportion of house-
holds engaged in livestock farming is the highest, making it one of the regions where
households are most vulnerable to climate shocks. The Region with the slightest vulner-
ability to climate shocks is the Centre-Est, where the Provinces of Koulpelgo and Kour-
itenga are located. This Region also has the country’s highest use of inorganic fertilisers
for soil fertilisation. The Province of Namentenga, on the other hand, is located in the
Centre-Nord Region, an area with the lowest consumption of inorganic fertilisers in the
country. However, this Region has the country’s highest household credit access rate.
The Province of Ziro is situated in the Centre-Ouest Region, where the access rate to
sanitary toilets is around 50%. All studied provinces are in regions that fall somewhere
in the middle of the thirteen regions regarding access to improved toilets, education
level, and poverty indices. These regions are also characterised by a low percentage of
households with access to Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). All the
studied provinces are located in regions showing clear interest in biogas technology,
whether to improve access to sanitation, increase agricultural production through the

Namentenga

Kourittenga
Ganzourgou

Ziro
Koulpelogo

Fig. 2  Map of Burkina Faso and location of the study area. Source: Prepared by authors

13
 Table 1  Demographic statistics of the regions to which the studied provinces belong compared to the highest and lowest value of the same category in other regions taken
from the 2018 Harmonised Survey of Household Living Conditions in Burkina Faso (INSD, 2021b). Source Compiled by authors
Region Plateau-Central Centre-Nord Centre-Est Centre-Ouest Lowest value Highest value
across all across all
Province Ganzourgou Namentenga Koulpelogo Kourittenga Ziro regions regions

Access to sanitary facilities (%) 48.3 46.1 48 50 28 96.7

Proportion of agricultural plots using inorganic fertiliser (%) 27.3 14.5 52.7 35.6 14.5 52.7
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

Proportion of households engaged in livestock farming (%) 90.8 88.7 72.4 76.1 15.5 90.8
Access to credit (%) 96.2 100 88.9 72.4 64.6 100
Vulnerability to climatic shocks (%) 88.2 78.9 61.6 77.5 61.6 91.2
No formal education (%) 89.9 91.5 84.5 87 44.1 91.6
Poverty rate (%) 34.2 60.8 53.3 53.9 5.3 70.9
Proportion of households with access to ICT (%) 4.3 2.1 4.3 4.2 1.7 42.2

13
 F. Laré et al.

supply of organic fertilisers, or enhance community resilience to the effects of climate

change.

3.2 Survey design and data collection

The data were collected from December 2022 to January 2023. The data collection process
involved administering questionnaires and technical field observations of the TLAD tech-
nology and its operation. The collected data include (1) demographic and socio-economic
characteristics of the household; (2) ownership and use of TLAD/biodigester; (3) house-
hold perception of TLAD and its by-products; (4) impact of TLAD on the household; and
(5) constraints to TLAD adoption in rural areas. The questionnaires were pre-tested for
reliability and validity before the primary survey, with 18 randomly selected households
with and without biogas digesters representing 10% of the total sample.
The survey was conducted with two guides fluent in the local language and familiar with
the study area. To ensure standardised data collection methods and credibility, two supervi-
sors were engaged to conduct and oversee the administration of questionnaires. This pro-
cess underwent scrutiny for data quality assurance. Face-to-face interviews were primarily
used for data collection. However, telephone interviews were an alternative method to col-
lect data from households in remote and hard-to-reach areas.
The study sample encompassed households with TLADs, households with biogas
digesters and households without biogas digesters. A sample of 120 households with a
TLAD in the study area was randomly selected from the list of all TLAD owners provided
by the PNB-BF. The sample size was determined following the method Yamane (1967)
proposed, with a 95% confidence interval and a 5% margin of error (e). An additional 60
TLAD non-owners, including 30 with a digester and 30 without a digester, were included
in the survey. To minimise biases in selecting TLAD non-owners, one household with a
simple biodigester and one without a biodigester was systematically surveyed after each
survey of four TLAD users. The number of households selected for interviews in each
province was proportional to the total number of TLADs built there.
The sampling methodology in the study area could not rely on a single sampling tech-
nique, as the total number of households with TLAD exceeded that of households with-
out TLAD. Therefore, a combination of simple random sampling and systematic sampling
methods was employed. Of the initial target of 180 households, responses were obtained
from 147 households (completion rate of 81.6%), including 76 with TLAD and 71 without
TLAD. The number of households sampled with TLAD and without TLAD is presented in
Table 2. The surplus of surveyed TLAD non-owners is mainly explained by some house-
holds listed in the PNB-BF database as having a TLAD and have not yet built their toilet
on the ground. However, the pipe to connect the latrine to the biodigester was already in
place. These households were, therefore, classified as households with a biodigester.

3.3 Data analysis

The data were analysed using descriptive statistics, the Fisher test, the t-test, and regres-
sion analysis with marginal effects. Initially, the Fisher test and t-test were used to examine
demographic and socioeconomic characteristics differences between rural households with
and without TLAD. Subsequently, a regression model with marginal effects was estimated
to identify factors influencing the adoption of TLAD by rural households. To achieve this,
demographic and socio-economic indicators were taken as independent variables. Logistic

13
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

Table 2  Sampled households with and without TLADs in the study area. Source: Computed by authors
Province Sampled households Sampled households without TLAD Total
with TLAD
Sampled households Sampled households
with digester without digester

Ganzourgou 15 5 4 24
Namentenga 8 1 2 11
Koulpelgo 10 6 4 20
Kouritenga 37 21 19 77
Ziro 6 7 2 15

regression is a widely adopted method that predicts the probability of a binary outcome
based on the set of predictive variables that may affect the outcome (Ali & Khan, 2023).
The logistic regression model Eq. (1) is given as follows:
n
∑
y∗i = 𝜶 + 𝜷 i X i + 𝜺i (1)
i=1

where y∗i is the unobserved value of TLAD adoption; Xi is the vector of independent vari-
ables; βi is the coefficient of estimates of independent variables; α and εi are the intercept
and error term, respectively, in the model.

4 Results

4.1 Household demographic and socio‑economic characteristics

The demographic and socio-economic characteristics of the households surveyed, whether

they own TLAD or not, are presented in Table 3. Descriptive statistics reveal that out of the
147 surveyed households, approximately 78% were headed by males. The average house-
hold size is about ten people, and approximately 40% of household heads are middle-aged
adults aged 41–50. Regardless of household types, agriculture remains the predominant
activity, with a prevalence of farms ranging from 1 to 5 hectares.
Regarding the level of education, only 34% of TLAD owners have received formal edu-
cation, primarily at the primary (22%) and secondary (12%) levels. The remaining 66% are
individuals without formal education, with some having undergone literacy courses (36%).
None of the respondents (0%) has received a tertiary education level. These statistics do
not significantly differ from those of non-TLAD owners.
Cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, donkeys, and poultry are the most commonly raised animals
within rural households, with the combined practice of grazing and confinement being the
prevailing mode of livestock management. Boreholes serve as the primary water source.
However, TLAD owner households seem to have limited water access compared to TLAD
non-owner households. Nearly 76% of TLAD owner households take more than 30 min
to obtain water, as opposed to only 66% among TLAD non-owner households. Neverthe-
less, 29% of TLAD owner households have free access to water, compared to only 18% of
TLAD non-owner households. In addition, for households that purchase water, TLAD own-
ers spend less, on average, US$11.96 per year, compared with around US$15.39 per year

13
 Table 3  Access to toilet-linked anaerobic digesters by household demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Source: Computed by authors
Household characteristics Frequency
TLAD owners TLAD non-owners Fisher statistics t-test

13
Gender Male 57 (75%) 58 (82%) p = 0.424
Female 19 (25%) 13 (18%)
Age 21–30 1 (1%) 2 (3%) p = 0.533
31–40 13 (17%) 16 (23%)
41–50 29 (38%) 30 (42%)
> 50 33 (43%) 23 (32%)
Education level Non-formal education 50 (66%) 45 (63%) p = 0.863
Formal education 26 (34%) 26 (36%)
Family size 1–5 members 9 (21%) 7 (15%) p = 0.397 t = 0.40; p = 0.68
6–10 members 18 (43%) 24 (51%)
More than 10 members 15 (36%) 16 (34%)
Source of income Agricultural 75 (99%) 71 (100%) p=1
Non-agricultural 1 (1%) 0 (0%)
Size of farmland < 1 ha 2 (5%) 1 (2%) p = 0.153
1–5 ha 26 (65%) 37 (79%)
> 5 ha 12 (30%) 9 (19%)
Livestock farming mode Grazing 0 (0%) 2 (4%) p = 0.066
Confinement 0 (0%) 1 (2%)
Grazing and confinement 40 (100%) 45 (94%)
F. Laré et al.
 Table 3  (continued)
Household characteristics Frequency
TLAD owners TLAD non-owners Fisher statistics t-test

Type of animals raised Cattle 62 (86%) 54 (77%) p = 0.196 t = 0.21; p = 0.83

Pigs 41 (57%) 27 (39%) p = 0.030* t =  − 0.56; p = 0.57
Sheep 66 (92%) 60 (86%) p = 0.298 t = 0.09; p = 0.92
Goats 66 (92%) 57 (81%) p = 0.087 t = 0.70; p = 0.48
Donkeys 32 (44%) 38 (54%) p = 0.313 t = 0.32; p = 0.74
Poultry 66 (92%) 70 (100%) p = 0.028* t =  − 0.52; p = 0.59
Water source Borehole 71 (93%) 36 (90%)
Marigot 1 (1%) 1 (3%) p = 0.456
Well 4 (5%) 3 (8%)
Distance to water source ≤ 30 min 18 (24%) 24 (34%) p = 0.203
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

> 30 min 58 (76%) 47 (66%)

Water purchase Yes 54 (71%) 58 (82%) p = 0.174 t = 0.54; p = 0.58
No 22 (29%) 13 (18%)
Source of financing Access to subsidies 56 (74%) 22 (55%) p = 0.000*
Self-funding 20 (26%) 18 (45%)
*
Significant at 0.05 level

13
 F. Laré et al.

for non-TLAD owners. However, the mean difference in the annual expenditure on water
between TLAD owner and non-owner households was insignificant (p > 0.1) (Table 3).
The results of the Fisher test indicate no significant difference between TLAD owners
and non-owners in gender, age, education level, household size, farm size, livestock-rear-
ing practices, or water access mode (p > 0.05). However, the TLAD owners are character-
ised by a high level of pig farming (Table 3). 57% of households owning TLADs rear pigs,
compared to only 39% among TLAD non-owners. However, the mean difference in the size
of pig herds between TLAD owner and non-owner households was insignificant (p = 0.57).
Similarly, the rate of access to subsidies for the TLAD owners and non-owners was 74%
and 55%, respectively. This shows that TLAD owner households had better access to subsi-
dies for biogas technology construction than TLAD non-owner households.

4.2 Access to various types of toilets

In the studied provinces, many rural households (54%) did not have functional toilets and
practised open defecation. Among the encountered types of latrines, traditional latrines
accounted for 16%, urine-diverting dry toilets accounted for 13%, and ventilated improved
pit (VIP) latrines accounted for 10%. TLADs were only used by 7% of the surveyed
households.

4.3 Perceptions of rural households on toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters

Overall, households surveyed in Burkina Faso exhibit a positive perception of TLADs.

Most TLAD non-owners, whether equipped with a simple biodigester or not (97%), show
no opposition to adopting TLADs and are willing to replace their existing toilets with this
system. Only a small proportion of households (3%) express a lack of desire to replace
their current toilets with TLADs, stating satisfaction with the existing facilities. How-
ever, all TLAD non-owner households have expressed willingness to use the biogas and
digestate from TLADs for cooking purposes and as fertilisers, respectively. In addition, no
reluctance has been observed regarding consuming food prepared with biogas or fertilised
with digestate from TLADs.

4.4 Factors affecting the adoption of toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters

A logistic regression model has been estimated using marginal effect to study the factors
influencing the adoption of TLAD in rural areas of Burkina Faso. Adopting TLAD was
considered the dependent variable, while demographic and socioeconomic factors were
considered independent variables. The marginal effect quantifies the change in probability
when the predictive variable increases by one unit (Ali & Khan, 2023).
Table 4 depicts the binary logistic regression results, which help to identify the deter-
minants of TLAD adoption. Two of the 12 explanatory variables identified significantly
influenced households’ decision to adopt TLAD. Water purchase significantly influenced
the adoption of TLAD (p < 0.1). Access to subsidies to acquire biogas technology also sig-
nificantly influenced (p < 0.05) the decision to adopt TLAD.
The logistic regression analysis results indicate a significant negative association
(p < 0.1) between the water purchase and the decision to adopt TLAD. As a result, the
probability of TLAD adoption decreases by a factor of 0.197 when transitioning from a

13
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

Table 4  Determinants of toilet-linked anaerobic digester adoption among rural households Source: Com-
puted by authors
Determinants β p-value Marginal effects p-value

Province 0.379 0.763 0.057 0.762

Gender 0.532 0.420 0.080 0.412
Age − 0.024 0.501 − 0.003 0.497
Education level − 0.820 0.174 − 0.123 0.154
Household size − 0.046 0.378 − 0.007 0.369
Source of income 0.598 0.999 0.090 0.999
Size of farmland 1.286 0.193 0.194 0.177
Livestock farming mode 18.58 0.998 2.803 0.998
Distance to water source − 0.281 0.650 − 0.042 0.648
Water purchase − 1.306* 0.080 − 0.197* 0.059
Access to subsidies 2.379** 0.002 0.359*** 0.000
Access to information on TLAD − 17.31 0.991 − 2.611 0.991
***
Significant at 0.001 level; **Significant at 0.01 level; *Significant at 0.1 level

household with free access to water to a household that pays for access to water. There-
fore, households with free access to water are more likely to adopt TLADs in rural areas.
Access to household subsidies has a significant (p < 0.01) and positive influence on adopt-
ing TLAD, as shown in Table 4. Specifically, having access to subsidies increases the prob-
ability of TLAD adoption by a factor of 0.359.

4.5 Adoption and operation of toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters

During the study, 76 TLAD owner households were surveyed. The survey result shows that
the adoption of TLADs by households is primarily aimed at preventing open defecation
(39%), improving compost quality (34%), increasing biogas production (30%), and achiev-
ing savings on toilet emptying (11%).
Of the 76 TLADs inspected, only ten were operational at the time of the survey, cor-
responding to a functionality rate of 13%. The main reasons for TLAD malfunction were
the lack of animal waste during specific periods of the year (70%) and water supply deficits
(32%). Issues such as gas leaks in plumbing (4%) and unresponsive maintenance services
(3%) were also reported by some households.
The majority of households with a functional TLAD (80%) have been using it for more
than three years and express satisfaction due to its practicality and ease of use (60%), the
reduced need for frequent emptying (20%), and its ability to produce biogas over several
days without frequent addition of animal waste (10%). The produced biogas is primarily
used for cooking (100%) and, to a lesser extent, for lighting (60%).

4.6 Impact of the toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters on the household

According to their users, the use of TLADs has positive impacts on the household. It
significantly contributes to improving the household environment and sanitation condi-
tions (50%), reducing expenses related to toilet emptying (30%), providing energy for

13
 F. Laré et al.

cooking (30%), precious during the rainy season, and producing high-quality organic
fertiliser (20%). These effects are analogous, albeit in different proportions, to those
reported by non-TLAD owners with a functional basic biodigester without a toilet con-
nection, except for the exclusive reduction in expenses associated with toilet emptying
for TLAD users.
Most surveyed rural households heavily depend on biomass as the primary energy
source for cooking. Firewood is used by 93% of the surveyed households, followed by agri-
cultural residues (84%) and charcoal (14%). Biogas (13%), butane gas (10%), and animal
waste (2%) are other energy sources used for cooking. Figure 3 details the various energy
sources used and the proportion of their use in a household based on the presence of a
functional TLAD, a functional biodigester without a toilet connection, or none of the two.
It is observed that the use of biogas from TLADs does not entirely replace or remove
the need for other energy sources such as firewood, charcoal, and agricultural residues
but rather reduces their usage. However, a functional TLAD prevents the household
from purchasing butane gas for cooking. Thus, TLADs positively impact household
finances, as evidenced by Table 5.

Fig. 3  Different energy sources used by each household category and their proportion. Source Prepared by
authors

13
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

Table 5  Average monthly expenditures on energy needs Source: Computed by authors

Household without bio- Households with functioning Households
digester biodigester with functioning
TLAD

Firewood US$6,96 US$6,49 US$4,63

Charcoal US$7,30 US$3,24 US$1,76
LPG US$7,30 US$0 US$0
Flare batteries US$0,41 US$0 US$0
Total US$21,96 US$9,73 US$6,39

The data analysis reveals that TLAD users spend an average of US$6.39 monthly to
meet their energy needs. This translates to savings of US$3.34 and US$15.57 compared
to households equipped with a functional biodigester without a toilet connection and those
without the two, respectively.

4.7 Constraints to the use and adoption of toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters in rural

areas

The challenges associated with TLADs exhibit similarities with those of biodigester tech-
nology, given that the biodigester constitutes the central element of these toilets. Survey
results revealed that the lack of access to water and insufficient organic substrate to feed the
biodigester were the primary obstacles to the proper functioning of TLADs, affecting 50%
of users. Additionally, 10% of TLAD users reported the presence of worms in the toilets as
a constraint. The survey also highlighted that the main obstacles to the adoption of TLADs
were the lack of financial resources in rural households (63%), insufficient or inadequate
supply of animal manure (54%), water scarcity (12%), and difficulties related to excavation
for biodigester construction (31%). Some households identified a lack of information (22%)
as a barrier to adopting TLAD. Furthermore, 3% of surveyed households asserted that the
failure of initial biodigester installations dissuades rural households from adopting TLAD
technology.
With these constraints and obstacles, households recommended several measures to pro-
mote adopting TLAD technology. Primarily, they suggested providing more credit facilities
to households interested in acquiring a TLAD (46%) or increasing government subsidies
(16%) to alleviate the financial burden on households. Among other proposed solutions
are assisting beneficiaries with excavation work (31%), raising awareness about biodigest-
ers (14%), and facilitating access to water or designing systems that reduce the amount of
water needed (14%).

5 Discussion

5.1 Household demographic and socio‑economic characteristics

In this study, the surveyed individuals are predominantly males, mostly belonging to the
middle-aged adult category, aged between 41 and 50 years. Furthermore, the majority of
these individuals have limited or no formal education. In contrast, Osei-Marfo et al. (2022)

13
 F. Laré et al.

presented results in Ghana, where most participants were young adults aged between 20
and 30 years and had predominantly received formal education. The average size of the
households surveyed is approximately ten people, slightly higher than the average house-
hold size in rural Burkina Faso, which is around seven people (INSD, 2021b).
Regarding gender, age, education level, household size, farm size, livestock practices,
and water access mode, no significant differences were observed between owners and non-
owners of TLAD. These findings contrast with previous studies conducted in India by Ali
and Khan (2023), indicating that the adoption of ecological toilets is strongly influenced
by the socio-economic profile of rural households, with factors such as age, education,
income, access to information, clean water, and other assets associated with a higher likeli-
hood of adoption.
Concerning livestock practices, no significant differences were observed between adopt-
ing and non-adopting households, except for pig and poultry farming (Table 3). TLAD
owners are characterised by a higher level of pig farming and a lower level of poultry farm-
ing than non-owners of TLAD. The prevalence of pig farming among TLAD owners can
be explained by non-profit organisations such as OCADES Caritas Burkina, which, within
the scope of their development initiatives, support vulnerable households in pig farming
practices and in financing the construction of toilets connected to digesters. This Associa-
tion promotes the “3-in-1” domestic digester model, widely popularised in southern China
(Chen et al., 2020), combining a biogas digester with a pigsty and toilets. Indeed, accord-
ing to Boyd Williams et al., (2022a, 2022b), pig farming is more suitable for lower socio-
economic households as it requires less land than cattle farming. The support provided by
these associations contributes to explaining why TLAD owners have better access to con-
struction subsidies than non-owners of TLAD.

5.2 Access to various types of toilets

The practice of open defecation remains prevalent in the studied areas. This behaviour can
be explained by several factors Kouassi et al. (2023) categorised as behavioural and social,
natural and technological, vulnerability and poverty, organisational, and socio-political.
Traditional latrines prevail as the most common type of toilets, followed by urine-divert-
ing dry toilets, ventilated pit latrines, and TLADs. The preference for traditional latrines
is attributed to their familiarity, ease of construction, and lower cost than ecosan systems
(Sangwa et al., 2023). However, TLADs represent the most minor proportion of toilets due
to their low functionality rate observed during the survey. Additionally, TLAD is a sanita-
tion technology recently introduced in Burkina Faso (Hien, 2017), and thus, it is not well-
known among rural households. As highlighted by Roubík et al. (2018), adopting a new
technology can be challenging when it is unfamiliar to households. Awareness and promo-
tion of TLADs among rural households could be beneficial, as these toilets can potentially
address energy shortages through biogas production (François et al., 2023). As emphasised
by Boyd Williams et al., (2022a, 2022b), the observation or trial of TLADs can positively
influence non-users perception, leading to TLAD adoption within a year of initial observa-
tion or trial.

5.3 Perceptions of rural households on toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters

According to Boyd Williams et al., (2022a, 2022b), households can be categorised into
three groups based on their perceptions: households with positive perceptions (indicating

13
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

that they would adopt or consider adopting a TLAD), households with negative percep-
tions (indicating that they would never adopt or use a TLAD); and undecided households
(neither positive nor negative).
Households surveyed in Burkina Faso generally fall into the upbeat category, demon-
strating a willingness to use TLADs and consume food prepared with biogas or fertilised
with digestate from TLADs. Similar results have been observed in KwaZulu Natal (South
Africa) (Okem & Odindo, 2020), where people expressed a willingness to use treated efflu-
ent from TLADs for food production. Studies in two districts of Ghana also revealed posi-
tive attitudes toward using human waste for biogas production (Osei-Marfo et al., 2022).
However, not all surveyed households are willing to adopt TLADs due to their prefer-
ence for existing toilets. These findings align with a case study in Rwanda reporting that
some individuals prefer sticking to traditional pit latrines due to their familiarity, ease of
construction, and lower cost compared to ecosan systems (Sangwa et al., 2023). These
examples underscore the importance of considering the interests and priorities of the pop-
ulation when promoting sanitation technologies (Davis et al., 2019), especially in rural
areas.

5.4 Factors affecting the adoption of toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters among rural

households

Our survey has highlighted the negative impact of water purchase on the adoption of
TLADs by rural communities (Table 4). This reluctance can be attributed to the additional
demand for freshwater (0.5–1.0 L per toilet) required for flushing/cleaning when toilets are
connected to an anaerobic digester (Surendra et al., 2013). This extra water demand can
pose an economic burden for households relying on water purchases. Thus, the economic
constraint associated with water purchase may encourage households to prefer dry sanita-
tion technologies, as Mamo et al. (2023) observed in rural regions of Ethiopia.
Our study also confirms the positive impact of subsidy access on TLAD adoption
(Table 4). Limited financial capacity among rural populations emerges as the main eco-
nomic and financial barrier to disseminating biodigesters and TLADs. Currently, there are
few or no financial institutions accessible to households, primarily in rural areas, to obtain
loans, credits, and subsidies (Uhunamure et al., 2021). To address this, the Government of
Burkina Faso has implemented a subsidy policy of approximately US$266 for a biodigester
with an estimated construction cost of US$522 (Hien, 2017). However, this subsidy only
covers biodigester construction, leaving the construction of connected toilets entirely the
beneficiary’s responsibility.
Furthermore, these subsidies are criticised as biogas technology remains unaffordable
for poorer households (Boyd Williams et al., 2022a, 2022b). In Burkina Faso, households
eligible for the biodigester construction subsidy are rural and peri-urban households own-
ing at least four head of cattle or eight head of pigs (Hien, 2017). Thus, the poorest house-
holds not meeting these criteria are excluded.
In the absence of confirmed sociocultural resistance in Burkina Faso, providing an addi-
tional subsidy for household toilet connection is necessary to promote and support TLAD
adoption, as implemented in Assam, India (Boyd Williams et al., 2022a, 2022b). To be
more effective, this additional subsidy for the toilet itself should be integrated into Burkina
Faso’s national domestic biogas program, as Cheng., et al. (2018) recommended.
Our study also found that gender and education level do not significantly influence
the adoption of TLADs in rural Burkina Faso (Table 4). These findings align with the

13
 F. Laré et al.

conclusions of Boyd Williams et al., (2022a, 2022b) and Osei-Marfo et al. (2022), assert-
ing that age, education level, or religion have no impact on the perception or intention to
use a TLAD.

5.5 Adoption and operation of toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters

The study revealed that the connection of toilets to biodigesters was primarily motivated
by the desire to improve sanitation and compost quality, increase biogas production, and
reduce emptying costs. These findings align with previous research conducted in Nepal,
Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Ghana, where households adopted TLADs based on the
social, health, and environmental benefits associated with these systems (Boyd Williams
et al., 2022a, 2022b; Osei-Marfo et al., 2022; Shallo et al., 2020). The biogas produced by
TLADs is primarily used for cooking, given the adaptation of biogas stoves to local food
preparation (Tucho & Nonhebel, 2017). However, despite improvements in biogas produc-
tion, TLADs alone cannot meet all the energy needs of households, resulting in continued
dependence on traditional fuels.

5.6 Impact of the toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters on the household

It is observed that the use of biogas from TLADs does not entirely replace or remove the
need for other energy sources such as firewood, charcoal, and agricultural residues but
rather reduces their use. Dependence on traditional fuels has been associated with negative
impacts on human health, the environment, and biodiversity (Onwosi et al., 2022). Thus,
by reducing traditional fuel consumption, TLADs improve households’ health and envi-
ronment. Additionally, TLADs provide high-quality digestate serving as organic fertiliser.
Lamolinara et al. (2022) report that using this fertiliser in fields has enhanced soil quality
and increased crop yields by 15% to 28%. Therefore, adopting TLADs brings economic
advantages through cost savings by offsetting traditional fuels and providing valuable ferti-
liser (Berhe et al., 2017).

5.7 Constraints to the use and adoption of toilet‑linked anaerobic digesters in rural

areas

The diffusion of TLAD technology in developing countries faces various challenges,

including financial constraints, a lack of raw materials and water, limited access to infor-
mation and education, and issues related to construction and maintenance.
The high cost of the initial investment associated with biogas technology, coupled with
limited access to credit and subsidies, hinders the adoption of TLADs by rural households
(Kalinda, 2019; Mulinda et al., 2013; Roubík et al., 2018). The precarious financial situa-
tion of most rural households in Africa, often living below the poverty threshold, restricts
their ability to invest in technologies with high initial investment costs (Bhatia et al., 2020;
Gassner et al., 2019; Kelebe et al., 2017).
Insufficient raw materials and limited water availability also present significant obsta-
cles to adopting TLADs. Mobilising additional animal manure to feed TLADs can be chal-
lenging due to grazing practices or limited herds (Laichena, 1989; Roubík et al., 2018).
Additionally, ensuring an adequate water supply remains challenging in many rural areas
of sub-Saharan Africa, including Burkina Faso, where less than 5% of households have

13
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

on-site water access (WHO/UNICEF, 2021). This water scarcity constitutes a significant
barrier to TLAD adoption, especially during the dry season, as these systems require
0.5–1.0 L of water per toilet for flushing/cleaning (Surendra et al., 2013).
Lack of information and awareness also hampers widespread adoption of TLADs in
Burkina Faso, where many potential users in rural communities are unaware of this tech-
nology’s existence and benefits. This can be attributed to the absence of specialised biogas
extension agents, limited media coverage, inadequate institutional collaboration, and the
inadequacy of biogas technology awareness programs in rural areas (Kalinda, 2019; Lai-
chena, 1989; Mukumba et al., 2016).
Construction difficulties, initial biodigester installation failures, and the availability of
cheap alternative fuels are additional obstacles to TLAD adoption. The construction of
TLADs, consisting of a toilet connected to a buried biodigester, can be complicated by
the geology of Burkina Faso, mainly dominated by Precambrian rocks from the Guinean
Ridge (Koffi et al., 2016; Schlüter, 2008). This geological composition makes excavation
challenging and results in additional costs for households. Furthermore, the prevalence of
non-functional biogas installations discourages potential users, limiting the widespread
acceptance of biogas technology (Laichena, 1989; Osei-Marfo et al., 2018). Additionally,
the availability of other cheap fuels, such as firewood, also contributes to the failure of
biogas systems (Shallo et al., 2020).
To address these challenges, it is imperative to design affordable and water-efficient
domestic biodigesters, improve access to credit and subsidies, optimise the use of avail-
able substrates, and enhance education and awareness regarding the benefits of TLAD.
Institutional collaboration between the National Biogas Program (PNB) and organisations
responsible for promoting sanitation, agriculture, and renewable energies would signifi-
cantly contribute to the increased promotion of TLADs in rural areas. Radio spots in local
radio stations and television programs, as well as awareness initiatives led by local leaders
within communities, can be effective channels for informing and raising awareness about
the benefits of TLAD.

6 Limits

While considered the first large-scale survey on adopting TLADs by households in Burkina
Faso, this study has data collection and geographical coverage limitations. The survey’s
scope was limited to provinces with a minimum of 15 installed TLADs, excluding rural
households in provinces with fewer installations. In hard-to-reach areas, telephone inter-
views were utilised. However, their effectiveness was constrained due to the low number of
respondents and limited data caused by mobile network coverage and quality issues.
Furthermore, male respondents are overrepresented due to their predominance as heads
of households. Additionally, the studied provinces are predominantly populated by Mossi,
one of Burkina Faso’s largest ethnic groups, making it challenging to generalise the results
to the entire country. Additional studies in other provinces of Burkina Faso, characterised
by different socio-cultural contexts, are needed to examine the acceptability and percep-
tions of TLADs in those regions. These studies should also be conducted on larger samples
to analyse perceptions based on geographical location, age groups, ethnic groups and reli-
gious groups.
This study also suffers from a lack of temporal analysis to examine the evolution of
TLAD adoption among rural households over time. Moreover, this study only considers the

13
 F. Laré et al.

implications of demographic and socio-economic variables of households without explor-

ing other factors that could influence TLAD adoption.

7 Conclusion

This study applied a household survey to investigate the factors that either promote or hin-
der the adoption of TLAD in rural areas of Burkina Faso. Knowledge and understanding of
these factors are crucial for the widespread adoption of this technology. The results indi-
cate that rural households in Burkina Faso generally hold a positive perception of TLAD,
with no identified socio-cultural barriers. Thus, the study concludes that the low adoption
of TLAD in rural Burkina Faso is primarily due to socio-economic constraints and peo-
ple’s ignorance. The high investment cost associated with TLAD, which is unaffordable
for most rural households, and limited access to water, which is essential for the technol-
ogy’s operation, constitute significant constraints hindering the dissemination of TLADs.
Therefore, free or low-cost access to water and better access to credit emerge as factors
that positively influence the adoption of TLAD. Furthermore, some potential users are still
unaware of the existence and benefits of TLAD. These benefits are on household health,
environment, and finances.
To create a conducive environment for the widespread adoption of TLADs in rural
areas of Burkina Faso, authorities and policymakers should include government subsidies
and financial support to address the associated costs of acquiring TLAD. It would also be
appropriate to integrate the promotion of TLAD into broader rural development strategies,
ensuring that subsidy programs are well-publicized and easily accessible to rural commu-
nities. Awareness campaigns and demonstration projects aimed at informing and educat-
ing rural communities about the benefits of TLAD, emphasizing their positive impact on
sanitation, access to energy, and environmental sustainability, should also be conducted.
Efforts should also be made to improve access to water for rural households in Burkina
Faso through the implementation of hydraulic infrastructure projects. The promotion of
TLAD would be significantly enhanced through partnerships between government agen-
cies, non-governmental organizations, and private sector entities, facilitating the pooling
of resources and expertise. It is also imperative to establish a robust monitoring and evalu-
ation system to assess the impact of TLAD over time, utilizing community feedback to
continuously improve and adapt promotion strategies.
The findings of this study provide valuable insights for promoting the adoption of
TLAD among rural households in Burkina Faso. Future research should focus on develop-
ing affordable, sustainable, and user-friendly toilet models while exploring the methano-
genic potential of various household-level raw materials, ensuring the successful imple-
mentation and sustainable use of biogas toilet technology. Moreover, factors other than
household demographic and socio-economic variables that could influence TLAD adop-
tion must be explored.
Acknowledgements The authors sincerely thank the National Biodigester Programme of Burkina Faso
(PNB-BF) for providing valuable data for this survey. Special thanks to Sylvie Yameogo, Gwladys Sand-
widi, Serges Somda, Joseph Lankoamba, Djénéba Sanou, and Lassané Pougda for their invaluable assis-
tance and support.

Author contributions FL contributed to conceptualisation, methodology, formal analysis and investiga-

tion, and original draft preparation; SKS contributed to conceptualisation, methodology, formal analysis,

13
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

supervision, and review & editing; YK contributed to methodology, formal analysis, access to PNB data-
base, and supervision. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Data availability The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are not publicly available
for confidentiality and security reasons but are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable
request.

Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
50(2), 179–211. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​0749-​5978(91)​90020-T
Ali, J., & Khan, W. (2023). Demographic, social and economic factors affecting the adoption of green toi-
lets among rural households in India. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1007/​s10668-​023-​02927-5
Amigun, B., Parawira, W., Musango, J., Aboyade, A., & Badmos, A. (2012). Anaerobic biogas generation
for rural area energy provision in Africa. Biogas. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5772/​32630
Asmal, I., Syarif, E., Amin, S., & Walenna, M. A. (2022). The impact of the environment and people’s
attitudes on greywater management in slum coastal settlements. Civil Engineering Journal. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​28991/​CEJ-​2022-​08-​12-​05
Banamwana, C., Musoke, D., Ntakirutimana, T., Buregyeya, E., Ssempebwa, J. C., Maina, G. W., &
Tumwesigye, N. M. (2022a). Factors associated with utilization of ecological sanitation technol-
ogy in Burera District, Rwanda: A mixed methods research. Environmental Health Insights, 16,
11786302221118228.
Banamwana, C., Musoke, D., Ntakirutimana, T., Buregyeya, E., Ssempebwa, J., Maina, G. W., & Tum-
wesigye, N. M. (2022b). Complexity of adoption and diffusion of ecological sanitation technology:
A review of literature. Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development, 12(11), 755–769.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​2166/​washd​ev.​2022.​041
Bauza, V., Ye, W., Liao, J., Majorin, F., & Clasen, T. (2023). Interventions to improve sanitation for pre-
venting diarrhoea. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​14651​858.​cd013​
328.​pub2
Berhe, M., Hoag, D., Tesfay, G., & Keske, C. (2017). Factors influencing the adoption of biogas digesters in
rural Ethiopia. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 7, 1–11. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s13705-​017-​0112-5
Bhatia, R. K., Govindarajan, R., Jain, A. K., Dhiman, R. K., Bhatia, S. K., & Bhatt, A. K. (2020). Conver-
sion of waste biomass into gaseous fuel: Present status and challenges in India. Bioenergy Research,
13(4), 1046–1068. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s12155-​020-​10137-4
Boyd Williams, N., Quilliam, R. S., Campbell, B., Ghatani, R., & Dickie, J. (2022a). Taboos, toilets
and biogas: Socio-technical pathways to acceptance of a sustainable household technology. Energy
Research & Social Science, 86, 102448. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​erss.​2021.​102448
Boyd Williams, N., Quilliam, R. S., Campbell, B., Raha, D., Baruah, D. C., Clarke, M. L., Sarma, R.,
Haque, C., Borah, T., & Dickie, J. (2022b). Challenging perceptions of socio-cultural rejection of a
taboo technology: Narratives of imagined transitions to domestic toilet-linked biogas in India. Energy
Research & Social Science, 92, 102802. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​erss.​2022.​102802
Budge, S., Ambelu, A., Bartram, J., Brown, J., & Hutchings, P. (2022). Environmental sanitation and the
evolution of water, sanitation and hygiene. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 100(4), 286–
288. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2471/​BLT.​21.​287137
Chen, L., Frederiksen, P., Li, X., & Shu, B. (2020). Review of biogas models and key challenges in the
further development in China. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 446(2), 15.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1088/​1755-​1315/​446/2/​022007/​meta
Cheng, S., Li, Z., Uddin, S. M., Mang, H. P., Zhou, X., Zhang, J., Zheng, L., & Zhang, L. (2018). Toilet
revolution in China. Journal of Environmental Management, 216, 347–356. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
jenvm​an.​2017.​09.​043
Davis, A., Javernick-Will, A., & Cook, S. M. (2019). Priority addressment protocol: Understanding the abil-
ity and potential of sanitation systems to address priorities. Environmental Science and Technology,
53(1), 401–411. Scopus. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1021/​acs.​est.​8b047​61

13
 F. Laré et al.

de Morais Lima, P., de Sampaio Lopes, T. A., Queiroz, L. M., & McConville, J. R. (2022). Resource-
oriented sanitation: Identifying appropriate technologies and environmental gains by coupling San-
tiago software and life cycle assessment in a Brazilian case study. Science of the Total Environment,
837, 155777. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​scito​tenv.​2022.​155777
Dickin, S., Dagerskog, L., Jiménez, A., Andersson, K., & Savadogo, K. (2018). Understanding sustained
use of ecological sanitation in rural Burkina Faso. Science of the Total Environment, 613–614,
140–148. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​scito​tenv.​2017.​08.​251
Duan, N., Zhang, D., Khoshnevisan, B., Kougias, P. G., Treu, L., Liu, Z., Lin, C., Liu, H., Zhang, Y., &
Angelidaki, I. (2020). Human waste anaerobic digestion as a promising low-carbon strategy: Oper-
ating performance, microbial dynamics and environmental footprint. Journal of Cleaner Produc-
tion, 256, 120414. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2020.​120414
Englebert, P. (2019). Burkina Faso: Unsteady Statehood in West Africa. Routledge. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
4324/​97804​29501​937
Eom, Y. S., Oh, H., Cho, J., & Kim, J. (2021). Social acceptance and willingness to pay for a smart Eco-
toilet system producing a Community-based bioenergy in Korea. Sustainable Energy Technologies
and Assessments, 47, 101400. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​seta.​2021.​101400
François, M., Lin, K.-S., Vaincoeur, E., Rachmadona, N., & Khoo, K. S. (2023). Haitians’ perceptions of
biogas produced via human excreta: An approach to the democratization of energy systems. Chem-
osphere, 334, 138986. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​chemo​sphere.​2023.​138986
Gassner, A., Harris, D., Mausch, K., Terheggen, A., Lopes, C., Finlayson, R. F., & Dobie, P. (2019).
Poverty eradication and food security through agriculture in Africa: Rethinking objectives and
entry points. Outlook on Agriculture, 48(4), 309–315. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​00307​27019​888513
Gitau, H., Chumo, I., Muindi, K., Simiyu, S., & Mberu, B. (2022). Awareness and attitudes towards the
use of recycled faecal sludge products in Nairobi’s slums. Cities & Health, 6(1), 149–158. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1080/​23748​834.​2020.​18042​90
Gizaw, Z., Yalew, A. W., Bitew, B. D., Lee, J., & Bisesi, M. (2022). Fecal indicator bacteria along mul-
tiple environmental exposure pathways (water, food, and soil) and intestinal parasites among chil-
dren in the rural northwest Ethiopia. BMC Gastroenterology, 22(1), 84. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​
s12876-​022-​02174-4
GTZ. (2007). feasibility study for a national domestic biogas programme in Burkina Faso (final draft).
https://​energ​ypedia.​info/​images/​3/​3e/​Domes​tic_​Biogas_​Progr​am_​in_​Burki​na_​Faso.​pdf
Hien, F. (2017). Plans d’Actions Technologiques pour l’Adaptation dans les secteurs de l’Agriculture et
de la Foresterie au Burkina Faso. Ministère de l’environnement, de l’économie verte et du change-
ment climatique.
INSD. (2021a). Annuaire statistique (p. 362). Institut national de la statistique et de la démographie.
INSD. (2021b). Enquête harmonisée sur les conditions de vie des ménages (EHCVM) de 2018 (p. 171).
Institut national de la statistique et de la démographie (INSD).
INSD. (2022). Enquête multisectorielle continue de 2018 (EMC-2018)—Analyse des données (p. 157).
Institut national de la statistique et de la démographie.
Kalinda, T. (2019). An assessment of the challenges affecting smallholder farmers in adopting biogas
technology in Zambia. Environmental Engineering Research, 9(1), 48.
Kelebe, H. E., Ayimut, K. M., Berhe, G. H., & Hintsa, K. (2017). Determinants for adoption decision
of small scale biogas technology by rural households in Tigray, Ethiopia. Energy Economics, 66,
272–278. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​eneco.​2017.​06.​022
Koffi, Y. H., Wenmenga, U., & Djro, S. C. (2016). Tarkwaian deposits of the Birimian Belt of Houndé:
Petrological, structural and geochemical study (Burkina-Faso, West Africa). International Journal
of Geosciences. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4236/​ijg.​2016.​75053
Kouassi, H. A. A., Andrianisa, H. A., Traoré, M. B., Sossou, S. K., Momo Nguematio, R., Ymélé, S. S.
S., & Ahossouhe, M. S. (2023). Review of the slippage factors from open defecation-free (ODF)
status towards open defecation (OD) after the Community-Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) approach
implementation. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 250, 114160. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijheh.​2023.​114160
Laichena, J. K. (1989). Rural energy in Kenya: Is there a future for biogas? A Survey. Energy Explora-
tion & Exploitation, 7(2), 116–127. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​01445​98789​00700​205
Lamolinara, B., Pérez-Martínez, A., Guardado-Yordi, E., Guillén Fiallos, C., Diéguez-Santana, K., &
Ruiz-Mercado, G. J. (2022). Anaerobic digestate management, environmental impacts, and techno-
economic challenges. Waste Management, 140, 14–30. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​wasman.​2021.​12.​
035
Leong, C. (2020). Narratives of sanitation: Motivating toilet use in India. Geoforum, 111, 24–38. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​geofo​r um.​2019.​10.​001

13
Determinants of biogas toilet adoption in rural Burkina Faso

LPSE. (2016). DECRET N°20161063/ PRES/PM/MEMC/MINEFID portant adoption de la Lettre de

Politique Sectorielle de l’Energie (LPSE).
Mamo, B. G., Novotný, J., & Ficek, F. (2023). Barriers for upgrading of latrines in rural Ethiopia: Dis-
entangling a sanitation socio-technical lock-in. Local Environment, 0(0), 1–19. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1080/​13549​839.​2023.​21847​81
Mukumba, P., Makaka, G., & Mamphweli, S. (2016). Biogas technology in South Africa, prob-
lems, challenges and solutions. International Journal of Sustainable Energy and Environmental
Research, 5(4), 58–69.
Mulinda, C., Hu, Q., & Pan, K. (2013). Dissemination and problems of african biogas technology.
Energy and Power Engineering. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4236/​epe.​2013.​58055
Obileke, K., Nwokolo, N., Makaka, G., Mukumba, P., & Onyeaka, H. (2021). Anaerobic digestion:
Technology for biogas production as a source of renewable energy—A review. Energy & Environ-
ment, 32(2), 191–225. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​09583​05X20​923117
Okem, A. E., & Odindo, A. O. (2020). Indigenous knowledge and acceptability of treated effluent in
agriculture. Sustainability, 12(21), 9304. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su122​19304
Onwosi, C. O., Ozoegwu, C. G., Nwagu, T. N., Nwobodo, T. N., Eke, I. E., Igbokwe, V. C., Ugwuoji,
E. T., & Ugwuodo, C. J. (2022). Cattle manure as a sustainable bioenergy source: Prospects and
environmental impacts of its utilization as a major feedstock in Nigeria. Bioresource Technology
Reports, 19, 101151. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​biteb.​2022.​101151
Osei-Marfo, M., Awuah, E., & de Vries, N. K. (2018). Biogas technology diffusion and shortfalls in
the central and greater Accra regions of Ghana. Water Practice and Technology, 13(4), 932–946.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​2166/​wpt.​2018.​100
Osei-Marfo, M., de Vries, N. K., & Awuah, E. (2022). People’s perceptions on the use of human excreta
for biogas generation in Ghana. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24(1), 352–376.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10668-​021-​01439-4
Osumanu, I. K., & Amin, A. M. (2023). Sanitation and hygiene practices in Northern Ghana: An analy-
sis of household health risks. Ghana Journal of Development Studies. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4314/​gjds.​
v20i1.9
PANER. (2015). Plan d’Action National des Energies Renouvelables (PANER).
PNB-BF. (2016). Rapport d’activites au 31 octobre 2016—Programme national de biodigesteurs du
Burkina Faso.
PNB-BF. (2023). Programme National de Biodigesteurs—Accueil [Page Web]. https://​www.​pnb-​bf.​org/​
index.​php/​fr/
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
Roubík, H., Mazancová, J., Phung, L. D., & Banout, J. (2018). Current approach to manure management
for small-scale Southeast Asian farmers—Using Vietnamese biogas and non-biogas farms as an
example. Renewable Energy, 115, 362–370. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​renene.​2017.​08.​068
Sangwa, S., Keza, L. D., Uwumuremyi, D., & Nijman-Ross, E. (2023). An evaluation of the application
of the circular production model in agriculture: Case study of Nyanza district Rwanda. Frontiers in
Sustainability, 4, 1167779. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​frsus.​2023.​11677​79
Schlüter, T. (2008). Geological atlas of Africa: With notes on stratigraphy, tectonics, economic geology,
geohazards geosites and geoscientific education of each Country. Springer.
Schouten, M. A. C., & Mathenge, R. W. (2010). Communal sanitation alternatives for slums: A case
study of Kibera, Kenya. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts a/b/c, 35(13), 815–822. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​pce.​2010.​07.​002
Shallo, L., Ayele, M., & Sime, G. (2020). Determinants of biogas technology adoption in southern Ethi-
opia. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 10(1), 1–13. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s13705-​019-​0236-x
Sharda, K. C., Shinjo, H., & Harada, H. (2020). People’s perception on ecological sanitation and health
risks associated in Central Nepal. Sanitation Value Chain, 4(3), 3–19. https://​doi.​org/​10.​34416/​svc.​
00023
Smith, J. U., Austin, G., Avery, L., & Balana, B. (2011). The potential of small-scale biogas digesters to
alleviate poverty and improve long term sustainability of ecosystem services in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Interdisciplinary Expert Workshop, Kampala (Group I) and Addis Ababa (Group II), pp. 4–5.
Somorin, T. O. (2020). Valorisation of human excreta for recovery of energy and high-value products: A
mini-review. Green Energy and Technology, 5, 341–370. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-​030-​38032-
8_​17
Sou/Dakoure, M., Maïga, Y., Maïga, A. H., Bologo, M. T., & Sossou, S. (2019). Experiment of a
resource-oriented agro-sanitation system in sahelian rural community case of Burkina Faso.
Resource-Oriented Agro-Sanitation Systems: Concept, Business Model, and Technology. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-4-​431-​56835-3_​17

13
 F. Laré et al.

Surendra, K. C., Takara, D., Jasinski, J., & Kumar Khanal, S. (2013). Household anaerobic digester for bio-
energy production in developing countries: Opportunities and challenges. Environmental Technology,
34(13–14), 1671–1689. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09593​330.​2013.​824012
Thery, D., Nacro, M., & Lagandre, E. (1981). Pratique du biogaz dans le Tiers Monde. Chine, Inde, Haute-
Volta Sénégal. ENDA Document Tiers-Monde, 17, 49.
Tucho, G. T., & Nonhebel, S. (2017). Alternative energy supply system to a rural village in Ethiopia.
Energy, Sustainability and Society, 7, 1–14. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s13705-​017-​0136-x
Uhunamure, S. E., Nethengwe, N. S., & Tinarwo, D. (2021). Development of a comprehensive conceptual
framework for biogas technology adoption in South Africa. Resources, 10(8), 76. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
3390/​resou​rces1​00800​76
Werkneh, A. A., & Gebru, S. B. (2023). Development of ecological sanitation approaches for integrated
recovery of biogas, nutrients and clean water from domestic wastewater. Resources, Environment and
Sustainability, 11, 100095. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​resenv.​2022.​100095
WHO. (2017). Diarrhoeal disease. https://​www.​who.​int/​news-​room/​fact-​sheets/​detail/​diarr​hoeal-​disea​se
WHO/UNICEF. (2021). Progress on household drinking water, sanitation and hygiene 2000–2020: Five
years into the SDGs. Geneva: World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s
Fund (UNICEF).

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under
a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable
law.

Authors and Affiliations

Ftimbé Laré1 · Seyram K. Sossou1 · Yacouba Konaté1

* Ftimbé Laré
ftimbe.lare@2ie-edu.org
Seyram K. Sossou
seyram.sossou@2ie-edu.org
Yacouba Konaté
yacouba.konate@2ie-edu.org
1
Laboratoire Eaux Hydro‑Systèmes et Agriculture, Institut International d’Ingénierie de l’Eau et de
l’Environnement (2iE), Rue de la Science, 01, BP 194, Ouagadougou 01, Burkina Faso

13