Category Archives: Economic Benefits

WASHplus Weekly: Focus on WASH & Financing

Issue 199| July 17, 2015 | Focus on WASH & Financing

Thanks to Jonathan Annis of TetraTech for suggesting this week’s topic. Resources and studies in this issue include 2015 discussion forums and webinars hosted by the Sustainable Sanitation Alliance (SuSanA), a series of WASH financing briefs, and new USAID Urban Pathway manuals.

DISCUSSION FORUMS/WEBINARS

Urban Sanitation Finance – From Macro to Micro Level, SuSanA Thematic Discussion, June–July 2015. Link
This discussion forum was structured along three themes: Public Finance, Microfinance, andCity Level Sustainable Cost Recovery and was supported by six experts on sanitation finance who provided leadership and addressed questions raised by forum users. Summaries of the discussions are available here.

Webinar about Results-Based Financing (RBF) for Sanitation – April 29, 2015. SuSanA. Link
This webinar was organized under the knowledge management initiative of the Building Demand for Sanitation program of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Peter Feldman moderated the webinar with support from Pippa Scott and Pete Cranston of Euforic Services. The Stockholm Environment Institute and the SuSanA Secretariat served as hosts.

REPORTS/ARTICLES

Finance Brief 1: Domestic Public Finance for WASH: What, Why, How? 2015. G Norman. Link
This report defines domestic public finance as funds derived from domestic taxes, raised at the national or local level. Domestic public finance is only part of the solution to service delivery in poor communities; user finance and donor finance are also part of the mix. Likewise, domestic public finance forms part of a wider governance puzzle: improving WASH services requires not just more government investment, but also diverse other elements including (for example) clear institutional mandates.

Finance Brief 2: Universal Water and Sanitation: How Did the Rich Countries Do It?2015. Public Finance for WASH. Link
This finance brief briefly summarizes the history of water and sanitation services provision in the U.S., the U.K., and South Korea, and considers whether this historical experience is relevant to low- and middle-income countries today.

Finance Brief 3: Municipal Finance for Sanitation in Three African Cities, 2015. B Edwards. Link (Download free but registration required)
This discussion paper reports data on municipal public finance for sanitation in three African cities, based on in-country examination of available budget records: Ga West Municipality, part of the Greater Accra conglomeration in Ghana; Maputo, capital of Mozambique; and Nakuru County in Kenya, including the city of Nakuru.

Continue reading

WASHplus Weekly: Focus on Waste Pickers

Issue 198| July 10, 2015 | Focus on Waste Pickers

This issue contains recent policy briefs, manuals, videos, and country studies on environmental health conditions and other issues faced by waste pickers. According to Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO), recognition is growing that waste pickers contribute to the local economy, to public health and safety, and to environmental sustainability. However, they often face low social status, deplorable living and working conditions, and little support from local governments. washplus-weekly

OVERVIEWS/POLICY

Managing the Emerging Waste Crisis in Developing Countries’ Large Cities, 2015. Institute of Development Studies. Link
This policy briefing identifies some of the key challenges and opportunities for transitioning waste management into resource management, which engages both the formal and informal sector and provides livelihoods for the urban poor. Mainstreaming the informal sector is both economically efficient and financially beneficial for local governments as it reduces the costs of waste management as well as the need for large-scale investments in infrastructure.

Forging a New Conceptualization of “The Public” in Waste Management, 2015. M Samson. Link
This paper critically analyzes innovative approaches to including informal waste pickers in service delivery in Belo Horizonte, Brazil, Pune, India, and Bogota, Colombia and argues that by mobilizing collectively to demand formal incorporation into municipal waste management systems waste pickers are expanding both the public sector and the public sphere; transforming relations among the state, formal economy, informal economy, and residents; and contributing to the forging of a more inclusive, participatory, and democratic state.

Solid Waste Management and Social Inclusion of Waste Pickers: Opportunities and Challenges, 2014. M Marello. Link
Authors explore the opportunities and challenges inherent in the model of cooperation between municipal solid waste systems and waste picker cooperatives. Enthusiasm is growing about waste picker inclusion, often as part of “integrated solid waste management.” The World Bank and the InterAmerican Development Bank, for example, have both funded projects to support waste picker integration into formal sector recycling.

Continue reading

USAID Sanitation Webinar

USAID Sanitation Webinar, April 28, 2015

More than 2.5 billion people lack access to improved sanitation worldwide. In this webinar, USAID’s Jesse Shapiro discusses and responds to participant questions about the impacts of sanitation; critical challenges to improving sanitation; the sanitation ladder and service chain; and programmatic interventions to improve sanitation.

Encouraging sanitation investment in the developing world: A cluster-randomized trial

Encouraging sanitation investment in the developing world: A cluster-randomized trial. Science, April 2015, DOI: 10.1126/science.aaa0491

Authors:  Raymond Guiteras1, James Levinsohn2, Ahmed Mushfiq Mobarak2,*
+ Author Affiliations
1Deptartment of Economics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA.

2School of Management, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
↵*Corresponding author. E-mail: ahmed.mobarak@yale.edu

Poor sanitation contributes to morbidity and mortality in the developing world, but there is disagreement on what policies can increase sanitation coverage. To measure the effects of alternative policies on investment in hygienic latrines, we assigned 380 communities in rural Bangladesh to different marketing treatments—community motivation and information; subsidies; a supply-side market access intervention; and a control—in a cluster-randomized trial.

Community motivation alone did not increase hygienic latrine ownership (+1.6 percentage points, p=0.43), nor did the supply-side intervention (+0.3 percentage points, p=.90). Subsidies to the majority of the landless poor increased ownership among subsidized households (+22.0 percentage points, p<.001) and their unsubsidized neighbors (+8.5 percentage points, p=.001), which suggests investment decisions are interlinked across neighbors. Subsidies also reduced open defecation by 14 percentage points (p<.001).

Trémolet Consulting – Toilets on Credit, 2015 (video)

Published on Feb 3, 2015

Can microfinance help increase access to sanitation? Today, 2.5 billion people do not use proper sanitation facilities. Essential services for maintaining latrines and treating faecal sludge are also underdeveloped. In many places, toilets can cost up to one year of income for poor households. Private operators of sanitation services do not have enough capital to acquire more equipment and respond to growing demand.

Since 2010, Trémolet Consulting and research partners based in Kenya MicroSave have been exploring the potential of microfinance for helping sanitation markets to develop. The research, funded by SHARE/DFID, culminated with an action-research in Tanzania in which financial institutions were trained to provide financial services for sanitation. This film explains why microfinance should be explored further, and potentially, included in sanitation programmes.

The film also presents what has been done in Tanzania under the action-research and takes the views of households, sanitation entrepreneurs, microfinance institutions and researchers.

 

WaterSHED – Rural Consumer Sanitation Adoption Study in Cambodia

Rural Consumer Sanitation Adoption Study: An Analyis of Rural Consumers in the Emerging Sanitation Market in Cambodia, 2014.

WaterSHED has published the findings from its comprehensive review of rural consumer sanitation adoption in Cambodia. The study evaluates WaterSHED’s Hands-Off sanitation marketing program, which was designed to catalyze the market for improved sanitation in rural Cambodia by stimulating household demand and improving the supply of affordable sanitation options for rural households. watershed-1

The study confirms that the WaterSHED program has resulted in a substantial acceleration in improved latrine coverage and usage in the study areas. Household consumers are now able to access an improved latrine more easily and more cheaply than before.

New distribution and sales mechanisms are increasing household awareness of and exposure to more affordable latrine products and increasing motivation to invest in an improved latrine.

Enterprises are demonstrating that they serve at least some segments of the previously unserved rural market.

Nonetheless, significant challenges still remain. The study reveals a number of opportunities to break down remaining barriers to uptake of improved latrines and to further evolve WaterSHED’s market-based approach.

Guy Hutton – Why Choosing the Preferred Sanitation Solution Should Be More Like Grocery Shopping

Guy Hutton – Why Choosing the Preferred Sanitation Solution Should Be More Like Grocery Shopping hutton

When we go to the supermarket, our decision-making is considerably aided by having the price, ingredients and source of goods clearly labeled. This allows us to rapidly compare the characteristics, perceived benefits, and price of different products to make what is usually an informed and instantaneous purchase decision.

When it comes to making investment choices for public programs, we do not traditionally have the same luxury of information. The full benefits and costs of those interventions, including the long-term costs to maintain and operate a service, are rarely understood or taken into account in the decision. As a result, public decisions are usually made based on the most visible costs (capital investment required from the public budget), historical choices and the political process.

To reduce the detrimental effects of these influences, we need to move public sector decision making more towards the supermarket model, and increase the availability of key information so that decisions can be more rational, consistent, and transparent.

Since 2007, the Water and Sanitation Program (WSP), part of the World Bank’s Water Global Practice, has been attempting to put a price on sanitation by essentially understanding two sides of the same coin: what the costs of current inaction on sanitation are (i.e. how much poor sanitation costs households and the wider economy) and how much acting will cost (i.e. increasing access to sanitation services).

When it comes to acting, we need to understand the alternatives. What technology option best suits the preferences and local practices, available land, population density, disposable income, and willingness to pay of different population groups? What are the benefits of different technology options? And who is able to pay for the costs of behavior change, capital investment and sustained service delivery?

Read the complete post on the World Bank Water Blog, Jan 2015.

You can a join an ongoing discussion on this blog on the SuSanA Forum.