Table 2.

Community perspectives on different approaches to larval source management, for malaria vector control

Approach	Perceived benefits	Concerns	Specific recommendations
Larviciding	• Reduces mosquito populations and malaria cases • Targets roots of the problem • Can provide broad area coverage • Balances mosquito control with water needs	• May have health and environmental safety concerns • May affect aquatic life and livestock • Requires significant cost and labour • Could be limited by community scepticism	• Educate and engage the community • Involve locals • Provide safe use guidelines • Plan and monitor strategically • Ensure effective communication between authorities, communities, and scientists
Habitat Manipulation	• Directly controls mosquito oviposition sites • Practical and enhances cleanliness • Deters dangerous animals	• There may be legal and environmental concerns • Is impractical during rainy seasons • Might impact the livelihoods of specific groups, e.g. fishermen	• Promote community education and participation • Collaborate with government agencies • Establish specific cleanup times and calendar of activity • Adapt methods to seasons and geographical areas, for feasibility
Source reduction/habitat removal	• Reduces mosquito populations sustainably • Leads to a cleaner environment • Decreases malaria cases • Can be implemented in designated areas	• Is a challenge because the water bodies also serve other purposes • Risks of new oviposition sites • There might be community resistance • It is time and labor-intensive	• Promote education and active community involvement • Designate activity areas and provide alternatives • Implement regulations and get local leaders to participate • Consider and preserve beneficial habitats