Household water treatment technologies have emerged as an important option for providing safe drinking water to people and communities without having access to improved water supplies. Many such technologies are available and selection of an appropriate technology from the set of available alternatives is difficult as it involves multiple criteria and non -quantifiable parameters. An attempt is made in this paper to present appl ication of Analyt ical Hierarchy Process ( AHP) and VIKOR technique s for ranking the hous ehold water treatment method s. Six household treatment methods were considered for six criteria weighted according to a panel of experts . The evaluation showed that chlorine disinfection as the most appropriate method followed by boiling by both the techniques . The proposed methodology is a rationalized process for realistic scenarios where multiple stakeholders and priorities are involved in selection of a household water treatment technology. Keywords: Household water treatment, AHP, VIKOR 1. Introduction According to a recent WHO report, 785 million people lack even a basic drinking -water service, including 144 million people who are dependent on surface water ( WHO/UNICEF, 2019) . The household water treatment technology empowers people and communities without access to safe water to improve the water quality by trea ting it and storing it safely at home (Sobsey et al., 2008). The effectiveness of any household water treatment technology is directly linked with its efficacy in microbial attenuation, compliance of people with the syst em and route for further contamination (Enger et al., 2013). Many wate r, sanitation and hygiene interventions suggest that household water treatment technologies have been underestimated in the context of reducing diarrheal diseases (Ojomo et al.,2015). Treating of water at household level often uses basic approaches of filtration, disinfection, thermal exposure, sedimentatio n or some combinations thereon . Some of the widely used household water treatment techno logies are boiling, disinfection using free chlorine (liquid or tablets), coagulation/chlorination, solar disinfection, biosa nd filters, and ceramic filters. By focussing on point of use rather than point of delivery that is treating water at household level, the risk of recontamination can be minimized (Mintz et al., 2001) . Although a variety of household water treatment technologies have been suggested and tested, the effectiveness and sustained use is still in doubt (Fewtrell et al., 2005). The selection of these household treatment techno logies is site specific and implementation of it is circumstantial for a particular population (Clasen, 2007). The selection in particular depends on many criteria like water quantity produced, treatment robustness, ease of operation, reliability, time to treat, cost to treat , supply chain requirements, post contamination etc (Sobsey et al., 2008). Sobsey et al. (2008) attempted a method to select suitable household water treatment technology bu t since it was simple summation , the criticality of the criter ion was not compared which does not give a clear idea as why a particular alternative was chosen over the other. Multiple criteria need to be considered in selection of suitable household water treatment technology which makes it a multi criteria decision making (MCDM) problem . Any decision making is a function of many attributes which define its suitability. It is a complex procedure which enables the user to state the problem clearly and structure it systematically. It helps the decision makers to examine and scale the problem in accordance with the requirements (Karimi et al., 2011). The outcome of this process is choice of an alternative which is preferred after considering a number of conflicting objectives. More than 50 MCDM techniques are documented i n the literature which involve highly sophisticated to simple scoring systems (Kalbar et al., 2012). MCDM helps the decision makers to examine and scale the problem in accordance with the requirements (Karimi et al., 2011). Multi -criteria decision - making allows both quantitative and qualitative criteria to be taken into consideration simultaneously (Srdjevic et al., 2012). In general, they are designed to help decision makers to integrate the different options, which reflect the opinions of the fact ors involved (Figueira et al., 2005). These are therefore more structured and logical approach to model any complex decision making problems. Commonly used MCDM methods are the analytical hierarchy process ( AHP ), the preference and outranking methods of PROMETHEE and ELECTRE (Kalbar et al., 2012) and the ideal point methods such as TOPSIS and VIKOR. All of these methods either fall under scoring models, compromising -stability models or preference ranking models. The AHP is useful for handling multiple criteria and objectives in the decision making process. The AHP approach is a systematic analysis technique which facilitates in definition of priorities and p