18.01.2013 Views

Economic Effects of Sustainable Sanitation - SuSanA

Economic Effects of Sustainable Sanitation - SuSanA

Economic Effects of Sustainable Sanitation - SuSanA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Table 2: Benefits and economic dimension <strong>of</strong> sustainable sanitation. Personal-level perspective (compiled from Hutton, 2001; Hutton et al., 2007; Rosemarin et al. 2008)<br />

Effect<br />

category<br />

Effect description<br />

Health Less morbidity and mortality<br />

Socioeconomic<br />

<strong>Economic</strong><br />

dimension?<br />

Yes. However,<br />

not included due<br />

to lack <strong>of</strong> data.<br />

Examples <strong>of</strong> averted costs<br />

person/year in Africa in EUR<br />

Saved health care costs Yes 0.46<br />

Saved transport costs to health service Yes 0.03<br />

Saved expenditure for food/drinks Yes 0.12<br />

Saved opportunity costs <strong>of</strong> time: Time gained due to less<br />

sickness (adults and school children), saved carer time<br />

(for children under 5 yrs.)<br />

Saved opportunity costs <strong>of</strong> time due to improved access<br />

to facilities<br />

Yes 1.86<br />

Fertiliser value Yes 4.59<br />

Improved environmental quality<br />

-<br />

<strong>Sustainable</strong> sanitation<br />

Comments Source<br />

Can for instance be measured in DALYs. Data was not<br />

available<br />

30% cases <strong>of</strong> diarrhoea would visit a health facility<br />

where<strong>of</strong> 8.2% are hospitalised the average <strong>of</strong> 5 days.<br />

50% <strong>of</strong> people visiting a health facility use transport<br />

involving costs.<br />

The cases that visit a health facility or are hospitalised<br />

have to pay for food and drinks.<br />

The GNI is taken as reference. Adults (15< yrs.) gain 2<br />

days (100% GNI), school children (5-15 yrs.) gain 3 days<br />

(100% GNI), infants (5>) gain 5 days (50% GNI)<br />

Yes 20.99 4.24 day are saved due to better access (100% GNI)<br />

Yes. However,<br />

not measured<br />

-<br />

Average value <strong>of</strong> nutrients excreted per person and year<br />

in Uganda with 50% atmospherical losses <strong>of</strong> nitrogen.<br />

Can for instance, be measured by<br />

applying the willingness to pay approach.<br />

Hutton et al. 2007,<br />

p. 484<br />

cf. Hutton et al.,<br />

2007, p. 485;<br />

Mulligan et al., 2005<br />

cf. Hutton et al.,<br />

2007, p. 485<br />

cf. Hutton et al.,<br />

2007, p. 485<br />

cf. Hutton et al.,<br />

2007, p. 486<br />

cf. Hutton et al.,<br />

2007, p. 492<br />

Joensson et al.,<br />

2004; Drechsel et<br />

al., 2004<br />

Hutton, 2001<br />

Social Increased privacy Not measurable - -<br />

Rosemarin et al.,<br />

2008, p. 34<br />

Increased dignity Not measurable - -<br />

Rosemarin et al.,<br />

2008, p. 34<br />

Improved safety Not measurable - -<br />

Rosemarin et al.,<br />

2008, p. 34<br />

Perceived environmental quality improved Not measurable - - Hutton, 2001, p. 344<br />

Gender<br />

Relief for women, as they are mostly engaged with<br />

water, sanitation and hygiene in a family and suffer<br />

under unimproved sanitation (e.g. large distance)<br />

Not measurable - -<br />

Rosemarin et al.,<br />

2008, p. 34<br />

Political<br />

Potential to raise votes (among others, from women,<br />

since they are <strong>of</strong>ten engaged with water sanitation and<br />

hygiene and represent half <strong>of</strong> the votes)<br />

Not measurable - -<br />

Rosemarin et al.,<br />

2008, p. 34<br />

Total averted costs per person and year (not comprehensive) 28.06<br />

Total costs <strong>of</strong> providing universal basic access to water supply and<br />

sanitation<br />

6.42<br />

BCR 4.37<br />

24

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!