The following papers on sanitation costs and financing were presented at the IRC Symposium 2010, ‘Pumps, Pipes and Promises: Costs, Finances and Accountability for Sustainable WASH Services’, held in The Hague from 16-18 November.
The economics of sanitation initiatives (ESI) for sanitation decision making in Southeast Asia. Author: Guy Hutton
This presentation discusses cost data from 5 Southeast Asian countries in various forms (by technology, by site/project, by hardware/software, by financing source, by timing, and under different infrastructure capacity use levels) to aid decision makers in intervention selection and to draw more general lessons about sanitation financing, efficiency and sustainability. Cost data were triangulated from household surveys, project or provider documents and local market surveys to estimate investment and annualized life cycle costs per household and per individual.
Sanitation costs analysis in Burkina Faso. Authors: Amah Klutse, Zakari Bouraima and Cyrille Amegnran
This study is conducted in the framework of the WASHCost project in Burkina Faso from data collected in both rural and peri-urban areas. A total of 661households have been surveyed of which 478 households had toilets.
The aim of the current paper is to compare the capital expenditure (CapEx) and the operational and maintenance expenditure (OpEx and CapManEx) for sanitation facilities in rural and peri-urban areas in Burkina Faso. It presents the magnitude of the relative cost of different types of sanitation infrastructures such as the VIP toilet, the Ecosan urine diverting toilet, the pour-flush toilet and the traditional pit latrine.
Assessing sanitation costs and services in Andhra Pradesh, India. Authors: M Snehalatha, V Ratna Reddy and N Jayakumar
The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC) is the flagship sanitation programme of efforts by the Government of India to reach the Millennium Development Goals, but it has not yet met its expectations. This paper described the methodologies and analysis of data from 20 villages across two agro-climatic zones in Andhra Pradesh on the costs of sanitation. It concludes that capital costs takes a lion share of the funding, followed by operation and maintenance costs while planning and budgeting for indirect and direct support costs and capital maintenance costs are negligible or missing.
Cost effectiveness analysis as a methodology to compare sanitation options in peri-urban Can Tho, Vietnam. Authors: J Willets, N Carrard, M Retamal, C Mitchell, Nguyen Hieu Trung, Nguyen Dinh Giang and M Paddon
It is challenging to make decisions about sanitation scale and technology choice for urban areas, however costing analyses have an important role to play in assisting determination of the most appropriate systems for a given context. The most appropriate technological system is the one that finds a locally acceptable balance between social (e.g., public health) outcomes, environmental (e.g., pollution, resource use and resource recovery) outcomes, and financial and economic outcomes (i.e. the costs and benefits for individuals, public and private organisations, and local society). There are many costing methods available. This paper describes the use of a cost-effectiveness analysis built on integrated resource planning principles. This method is suited to situations where the overall goal is already clear (in this case, that a wastewater service is required) and the analysis is conducted to identify the least cost solution to reach this goal. This costing method was used in conjunction with a deliberative sustainability assessment process that addressed non-monetary factors.
Improving the robustness of financial and economic analysis of sanitation systems. Authors: Jonathan Parkinson and Steffen Blume
With a view towards improving the robustness of financial and economic analysis, this paper discusses current approaches towards the assessment of costs and benefits associated with sanitation improvements. Using results from a study that compares urine diversion dehydration toilets with conventional sanitation technologies in sub-Saharan Africa, the authors highlight challenges related to financial and economic modeling of sanitation systems. Excreta reuse is identified as a specific area where there is a need for further development. Specific attention is placed upon the quantification of the economic benefits of excreta reuse and the authors describe the approach for monetising these benefits. The authors offer specific recommendations for improving the robustness of this analysis, and propose a framework for categorizing financial and economic parameters for project design, sanitation programming, and policy-making. The authors argue that the consistent application of the proposed framework, combined with the standardisation of methodologies and the systematic collation of financial and economic data is required for future studies to assess the financial and economic costs and benefits of different types of sanitation systems.
A costs analysis of hygiene promotion interventions in Mozambique. Author: Maarten van de Reep
The main question this study answers is: What are the full life cycle costs per capita of hygiene promotion interventions in Mozambique? To answer this question requires performing a type of analysis which is often referred to as a cost analysis.
This cost analysis was carried out using a societal perspective covering the five year period from 2005 to 2010. Cost data was obtained from organisations involved in supporting and providing hygiene promotion interventions and households. Cost data was collected through various means including: publically available project reports, internal project reports, financial statements, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions. Cost data from households was obtained through household questionnaires.
Effective public finance for household sanitation: a study for WaterAid. Author: Sophie Trémolet
The way in which public funds are used to support sanitation can have widely diverging results in terms of provision of sustainable sanitation services, particularly in terms of effectiveness and equity. To test this hypothesis and learn about the most efficient ways to allocate public finance to the sector, WaterAid commissioned a study about public finance for sanitation in rural Thailand, rural Bihar (India) under the Total Sanitation Campaign and in Dar es Salaam (Tanzania).
The study evaluated public finance for sanitation on the basis of three key criteria, including comprehensiveness (whether funding is allocated so that all segments of the sanitation value chain function effectively), equity (whether funds are adequately targeted to reach the poor and disadvantaged groups) and leveraging (whether public funds are used in a way that effectively leverages other forms of finance). The study found wide differences in approaches to providing public funding for sanitation services and resulting outcomes.