Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions in Vietnam - WSP

More documents

Recommendations

Info

VII.Sanitation Program Designand Scaling Up7.1 OVERVIEW OF PROGRAMS AT FIELDSITESThis chapter considers projects more widely, beyond thesingle sites of the ESI field work. Table 49 lists the projectsand programs analyzed, and their approaches and activities.Five urban sanitation projects are analyzed that representthree different regions: the northern region (Three Citiesproject, WSPST); the central region (Tam Ky project,Buon Ma Thuot project); and the southern region (ThreeDelta Towns project). The cities affected by the projectsbelong to different urban categories, from the 1st category(Hai Phong, Da Nang) to the 4th and 5th category (SmallTowns program). The projects also target different beneficiariesincluding: the urban poor (Tam Ky); communitiesin mountainous areas (Small Towns program); tourismareas (Bai Chay, Ha Long city). The Three Delta Townproject provided an integrated program of support for theimprovement of water supply, drainage and householdtoilets, as well as capacity building for local water supplyand sanitation service providers. The Tam Key project includedsimilar infrastructure improvement. The Bai Chay,Ha Long and Buon Ma Thuot projects aimed to improvesewerage and drainage systems with centralized wastewatercollection and treatment. Bai Chay focused on the primaryand secondary sewerage and drainage network, and endof-pipewastewater treatment plant. Buon Ma Thuot was apilot project implementing small-bore sewerage and without-septic-tankhousehold connection followed by low-costwastewater treatment in ponds and reuse. A solid wastemanagement component was included only in the ThreeCities project. Support for some projects came from loansfrom international financiers (World Bank, ADB). Otherswere provided with grants or loans from foreign countries(Australia, Finland, and Denmark).Rural sanitation projects were implemented in the NorthernPeri-urban (Lai Xa, Hanoi), Rural Central (Quang Nam,Quang Ngai) and Rural Southern regions (Vinh Long, CuuLong delta). These projects were supported by bilateral agencies(Australia), and international NGOs (Plan International,YWAM, and IDE). The integration of soft interventions andhousehold toilet improvement support was a common approachof the projects analyzed, except the project of IDE inQuang Nam, where a soft sanitation marketing interventionwas adopted. The only cluster wastewater management wasapplied in a community-based sanitation project in Lai Xa.This chapter also analyzes a biogas program, which is beingimplemented throughout most provinces in Vietnamby SNV and the Vietnamese Government. The programprovides technical input and seed financial support at thehousehold scale, and also includes a biogas project implementedby a pig farm owner’s initiative.Three different solid waste management projects are analyzed.One is the 3R initiative in some pilot wards in Hanoicity, funded by the Japanese Government. The other is asolid waste management project for the small tourism townof Cua Lo, Nghe An province, funded by the Danish Government,where the management model of a Joint StockCompany for solid waste service has been supported. Thelast project is an initiative by a local cooperative trying tobuild its capacity for a solid waste collection and disposalservice for the rural community in a mountainous area ofNorthern Vietnam.The conduct of a robust program approach analysis (PAA)was severely constrained by a lack of available input datafrom the programs evaluated, which limited the number ofprograms that could be included in the study. The results ofthe analysis are interpreted taking into account setting-specificconditions that are partially responsible for the performanceresults; hence findings are not definitive, but insteadillustrative and instructive.88Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions
Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions in Vietnam | Sanitation Program Design and Scaling UpTABLE 49: LIST OF PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS ANALYZED1 Urban sanitation projectsa Three Delta Towns Water Supply and Sanitation Projectb Expanding benefits for the poor through urban environmental improvements in Tam Ky cityc Three Cities sanitation project (Hai Phong, Da Nang, Ha Long)d Environmental sanitation project for Buon Ma Thuot citye Water supply and sanitation for a small towns program (WSPST)2 Rural sanitation projectsa Cuu Long Delta RWS Projectb Sanitation, Hygiene and Water Improvement Project (SHWIP) in Quang Ngai provincec Sanitation marketing project in Binh Trieu commune, Thang Binh district, Quang Nam provinced Community-based sanitation in Lai Xa village, Kim Chung commune, Hoai Duc district, Hanoi3 Biogas digester promotion projectsa The Vietnam Biogas Programmeb Biogas for a pig farm in Thieu Duong commune, Thieu Hoa district, Thanh Hoa province4 Solid waste management improvement projectsa Implementation support for 3R Initiative in pilot wards of Hanoi cityb Solid waste management improvement project in Cua Lo town, Nghe An provincec Solid waste management improvement in a Duc Thang commune, Hiep Hoa district, Bac Giang province7.2 KEY FINDINGS OF THE PROGRAMAPPROACH ANALYSISA detailed assessment of each project is provided in Annex1. This section provides a summary of lessons learned.7.2.1 URBAN SANITATION PROJECTSIn most projects, the challenges faced relate to: technologicaloption selection; the quality of design and construction;consultant competency; administrative appraisal procedures;low rates of household connection; financial sustainability;and local capacity for operation and maintenance(O&M), monitoring, evaluation and control in the projectdefinition stages.Most urban sanitation projects are associated with externalsupport. Over 80% of urban sanitation funding comesfrom official development assistance (ODA) contributions(World Bank, 2006).A systematic and comprehensive approach for project formulation,management, implementation and evaluation isnecessary to ensure the project success and sustainability,where the following elements are crucial: (a) during investmentstudies–socio-economic survey, and studies on willingnessto pay and commitment to connect to sewerage;(b) activities accompanying infrastructure developmentcapacitybuilding, human resource development strategy,management model and financial structure, awareness-raisingprograms, evaluation of different technological options;and (c) project monitoring and evaluation.A range of sanitation approaches and technologies mustbe considered while a project is under development. Localaspects to be considered include low-incomes, topographicaland other natural features, and other socio-economicalconditions. Some initial options to be considered are:combined sewerage and drainage versus a separate system;centralized versus decentralized sanitation schemes; conventionalversus high-tech or low-cost technological options;or a combination of these. The proper collection,treatment and disposal of sludge from septic tanks needsspecial attention in Vietnam. Also, urban environmentalsanitation projects commonly do not include tertiarytreatment of sewage and providing a drainage network forstormwater. An appropriate technical solution for a combinedsewerage and drainage network should be developedin order to avoid untreated wastewater from sewers. Lessonsfrom the first implemented systems should be studiedwww.wsp.org89
Page 3:
Economic Assessment ofSanitation In
Page 9:
Economic Assessment of Sanitation I
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 17:
ForewordTarget 10 of the Millennium
Page 22 and 23:
Glossary of TermsBenefit-cost ratio
Page 24 and 25:
AcknowledgmentsThe Economics of San
Page 27 and 28:
V. National Benefits of Improved Sa
Page 29 and 30:
Table 32. Sanitation coverage, and
Page 31:
Figure 34. What factors were of mos
Page 34 and 35:
Annex Table E1. Level of satisfacti
Page 36 and 37:
Annex Table J1. Site U1 (Dong Thap,
Page 38 and 39:
PopulationSelected Development Indi
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
III.Study MethodsThe study methodol
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
IV.Local Benefits of Improved Sanit
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77: Economic Assessment of Sanitation I
Page 117 and 118: VI.Costs of Improved Sanitationand
Page 125: Economic Assessment of Sanitation I
Page 149 and 150: ReferencesAcharya A, Paunio MK and
Page 152 and 153: ANNEX 1: PROGRAM APPROACH ANALYSIST
Page 166 and 167: ANNEX TABLESANNEX A. STUDY METHODST
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
show all

Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions in Vietnam - WSP

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?