Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions in Vietnam - WSP

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions in Vietnam | Methodsdemonstrate it. Poor sanitation and hygiene may affecttourists in two ways:1. Short-term welfare loss and expenses. Tourists getailments such as diarrhea, intestinal worms and hepatitis,which entail direct healthcare costs, and whentourists are exposed to environments with poor sanitationtheir enjoyment is affected.2. Reduced tourist numbers. In the longer term, touristsstay away from tourist locations that are deemedto be unsafe (from a health perspective) or unpleasant,such as those with unclean water, a smelly environmentor no proper toilets. Tourists may stayaway from Vietnam, either because they have alreadyhad an unpleasant experience and have chosen notto come back, or because they have been advised toavoid a location due, among other things, to poorsanitation.The present study attempts to explore these two impacts viaa survey of non-resident foreign visitors. As well as holidaytourists, business visitors were also included to enable animportant link to be made with the business survey (seesection 3.5.2). A total of 300 tourists and business visitorswere interviewed across the country. It was planned thatthe survey would be conducted at international airports asthe visitors were leaving Vietnam. However, due to strictairport control during avian influenza and other diseaseoutbreaks, this was not possible. Instead, the team, with theagreement of WSP, interviewed tourists during their toursin Vietnam. The study was supported by number of touragencies.Table 13 shows the sample size by type of visitor, majorcategories of nationality, and whether they were return visitorsor not. Among the 300 respondents, more than 60%were from Australia/New Zealand, North America and Europe,less than 30% were from Asia, and only 10% werefrom South America. Although Asian tourists account forthe largest proportion of overall tourists to Vietnam, it wasmuch easier for the survey to approach Western tourists becausethey could speak English and were more familiar withquestionnaire surveys. An approximately equal number ofmen and women answered the questionnaire. The averagenumber of previous trips made by respondents was 1.5,indicating previous experience of Vietnam and suggestingthat the answers given were reliable.The survey form included questions on the following topics:• Length of trip, places stayed and price category ofhotel.• Level of enjoyment of different locations visited, andreasons.• Sanitary condition of places visited, and availabilityof toilets.• Water and sanitation-related sicknesses suffered, perceivedsources, days of sickness, and type and cost oftreatment sought.• Major sources of concern during the holiday stay inVietnam.• Intention to return to Vietnam, recommendation tofriends, and reasons.TABLE 13: BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE TOURISTS SURVEYEDVariableAsiaAustralia/NewZealandNorth America andEuropeSouth AmericaNo. of tourists interviewed 76 45 146 33 300Gender (%)Average no. of previous trips tocountry (time)Average length of stay for this trip(day)Purpose of visit (%)Male 53% 42% 61% 39% 54%Female 47% 58% 39% 61% 46%2.4 0.8 1.6 0.2 1.5Total129.6 20.2 40.3 - 58.6Tourism 49% 78% 78% 100% 73%Business 51% 22% 22% 0% 27%28Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions
Economic Assessment of Sanitation Interventions in Vietnam | Methods3.5.2 BUSINESS SURVEYPoor sanitation has the potential to affect not only tourism,but also businesses. Two types of impact were assessed;the local-level ‘micro’ impact, and the higher-level ‘macro’impact:1. Businesses located in areas with poor sanitation maypay higher costs (e.g. having to pay more to accessclean water) or lose income (due to customers beingunwilling to visit the location). It should be noted,however, that the customer losses assessed here arenot necessarily absolute losses to the country, as customersmay have the choice to go elsewhere – i.e. toother locations in Vietnam.2. Foreign businesses that decide not to locate in Vietnam.Sanitation may be among the many reasonsfor deciding whether to locate a business in Vietnam.This decision may include: (a) the health ofthe workforce, due to actual statistics or a businessleader’s perception of the poor health of a nation’sworkers; (b) poor (perceived) quality of water availableto the business, and the related costs; (c) a generallypoor environment (solid waste, unsightliness),which affects the ability to do business; and (d) theundesirability of locating foreign staff in Vietnamdue to the poor sanitary conditions.In order to assess both of these hypothesized effects, 21 businessfirms were surveyed using the questionnaires. Table 14lists the type of firms surveyed and identifies their ownership(local or foreign). These firms were selected becauseof the link between sanitation and their business, and theimportance of the sector and specific firm to the economyof Vietnam. Since the survey included only those foreignfirms that had already located in Vietnam, a key category –firms that had decided against locating in Vietnam – wereomitted from the sample. However, foreign firms wereasked about the factors affecting their decision to locate inVietnam, and their experiences of the country.The survey form included questions on the following topics:• Ownership, sector, activities, employees and locationof firm (production, sales, etc.).• Perceptions of sanitation at company location.• Factors affecting decision to locate in country orarea, and intention to relocate.• The production and sales costs related to differentaspects of poor sanitation (health, water, environment).• Potential costs and benefits of improved sanitationrelated to the business.TABLE 14: NUMBER OF BUSINESSES APPROACHED FOR SURVEY, BY MAIN SECTORS OF LOCAL AND FOREIGN FIRMSMain business or sector of firm Local business Foreign firm TotalHotel 1 1 2Aviation 2 2Real estate 1 1Food and drink producer 7 7Pharmacy 2 2Tourism 2 2Soap and domestic goods 1 1Green civil engineering and architecture 1 1Development and cooperation consultancy 2 2Life, health and other insurances 1 1Pump and wastewater equipment 1 1Total 4 18 22www.wsp.org29
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: Economic Assessment of Sanitation I
Page 46 and 47: III.Study MethodsThe study methodol
Page 60: Economic Assessment of Sanitation I
Page 70 and 71: IV.Local Benefits of Improved Sanit
Page 117 and 118:
VI.Costs of Improved Sanitationand
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
ReferencesAcharya A, Paunio MK and
Page 152 and 153:
ANNEX 1: PROGRAM APPROACH ANALYSIST
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
ANNEX TABLESANNEX A. STUDY METHODST
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
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?