Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions in Vietnam - WSP

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions in Vietnam | Annex Tables2. PROGRAM APPROACH ANALYSIS FOR RURAL SANITATION PROJECTSProjectRationalImplementerProgram approach andactivitiesImpactsLessonsCuu Long Delta RWS ProjectImprovement of rural water supply and sanitation situation for rural communities in the Cuu Long(Mekong) delta with technical and financial support from the Australian Government (2001 – 2008).Site R2 of the current study.Provincial Centres for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation (PCERWASS) in Bac Lieu, Ben Tre,Kien Giang, Long An and Vinh Long. The National Centre for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation(NCERWASS) was responsible for state management of the Project.The four main components of the project were: water supply and sanitation promotion; institutionalcapacity building; a district town water and sanitation services investment program; and a rural waterand sanitation services investment program.Approximately 390,000 people in 45 communes across five provinces have directly benefited fromsustained access to improved water supply and sanitation services. The Community ParticipationApproach ensured communication channels between community and institutional stakeholders wereestablished and effective throughout the project implementation cycle. IEC campaigns targetinginfrastructure beneficiaries have focused on improved health and hygiene practices with respect towater supply and sanitation. The rate of water and sanitation-related diseases has decreased thanksto improved infrastructure. Improved access to safe water by the poor and others who handle waterappropriately will benefit their health in the long term and in many cases will reduce the incidence ofpoverty as a result of reduced water- and excreta-related illness.Households living close to the main road are willing to pay a monthly fee for garbage collection.Households living far from the main road put garbage into holes or burn it in their gardens. Manypeople are aware of the danger of using plastic bags.The development of a local implementation model for rural water supply and sanitation facilityownership, piped scheme management and a demand-responsive approach (which incorporatescommunity participation and health/hygiene promotion in each phase of the project cycle) was crucial,especially when the guidance from the National Strategy for Rural Water Supply and Sanitation wastoo general for all regions. The project also documented a capacity-building framework for managersof rural piped schemes and developed a pricing model for calculating water tariffs.Although the project had a strong impact on the poorer sections of its recipients, it has not yetreached the general population in the project provinces. Better-coordinated interaction between thelocal authorities would expand the service to a greater number of households within and beyond theproject cycle.More effort to set up continuous community participation and health promotion programs within andbeyond the project framework should be made by the central and local authorities. A clear mandateand operational mechanism for the financing, implementation and monitoring and evaluation of theseactivities at the provincial level should be set up. Share funding for a more efficient and sustainableinfrastructure service among relevant local authorities is necessary. The project completion reportstated that future RWSS projects in Vietnam should focus on identifying implementation and fundingstructures that promise more sustainable integration of community consultation, health promotion andinfrastructure.120Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions
Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions in Vietnam | Annex TablesProjectRationalImplementerProgram approach andactivitiesImpactsLessonsSanitation, Hygiene and Water Improvement Project (SHWIP) in Quang Ngai ProvinceImprovement of the sanitation, hygiene and water situation for the rural poor in the central area, withtechnical and financial support from an international NGO, Plan International, (2006 - 2010). Theproject is implemented in 16 communes in Tu Nghia, Nghia Hanh and Son Tinh districts, Quang NgaiProvince. Son Tinh commune is Site R3 in the current study.Plan Australia and Plan Vietnam, local authorities, Women’s Union of Quang Ngai.The SHWIP Project proposed to bring about change in five key areas: improvement of sanitation andhygiene practice among school children; enhancement of women’s participation; behavior changein household water and sanitation investment; institutional involvement of the local authorities andtechnical agencies responsible for hygienic sanitation and safe drinking water; and access to waterand sanitation through the introduction of improved latrines and water supply.The main components of the project are: capacity for the stakeholders involved; introduction ofinformed choice water and sanitation facilities; provision of water supply for water-scare sites; andproject management, monitoring and evaluation.The project has been running for three years, and has provided improvement and new construction of9,100 facilities, including 8,000 toilets, and 1,300 water supply facilities. There are 8,100 beneficiaryhouseholds.At Tinh Dong commune (the survey site of the current study), 745 households have been supported.The water and sanitation facilities constructed include: 201 septic tanks; 185 double-vault compostingtoilets; 203 bathrooms; 13 water filters; 169 household dug wells; and 10 community wells.Coverage of households with access to an adequate water supply has risen from 40% (2006) to 70%(September 2009). Hygienic latrine coverage has risen from 30% (2006) to 72% (2009).Local capacity has been significantly improved and awareness of hygiene and health has beenincreased. Sanitation facilities and improved communication and public participation have contributedgreatly to the socio-economic development of the community.Informed choice of poor household should be supported. Key project activities, which are highlyvalued by the community include project area mapping, and ensuring actual participation,communication, clarity and equity.Large household contributions to cover the full cost of the sanitation facility (besides set financialsupport from the donors and local government) would limit the participation of the poor. Actualinflation and local prices are to be considered.The solid waste component should be integrated.More focus should be placed on capacity building for local project implementers, monitoring andevaluation, and follow-up activities.Better coordination and integration between project activities and activities under central and localgovernment programs is necessary for better resource mobilization, efficiency and sustainability.www.wsp.org121
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:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108: Economic Assessment of Sanitation I
Page 117 and 118: VI.Costs of Improved Sanitationand
Page 127: 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 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?