Shifting to life-cycle costing
•
2 likes•963 views
WASH 2011 conference: Catarina Fonseca, IRC
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Shifting to life-cycle costing
Similar to Shifting to life-cycle costing (20)
More from International WaterCentre
More from International WaterCentre (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Shifting to life-cycle costing
- 4. Timeline of water infrastructure: Ankushapur (India) 2nd piped water supply system constructed 2 Borewell Electric Motors & new Dist. system 2 hand Pumps & Bore well 1 Borewell & Electric motor 3rd Hand pump 1st bore well Electric Motor & 1st Dist. system 1 Bore well & Electric motor 1 Bore well & Electric motor Open well 1 Bore well 2 hand pumps 1979 1986 1991 1988 2003 1998 1983 1980 2007 1982 1987 1989 1993 2000 2004 2005 First Hand pumps (2) 6 hand pumps 2 Borewell Electric Motors & new Dist. system 4th Hand pump 1 hand pumps 2 Borewell Electric Motors & new Dist. system
- 13. Water service levels Source: Moriarty et al., 2010
- 14. Water service levels(details) Source: Moriarty et al., 2010 Source: Moriarty et al., 2010
- 15. Sanitation service levels Source: Potter et al., 2010
- 16. Water service ladder High service: people access a minimum of 60l/c/d of high quality water on demand High Intermediate service: people access a minimum of 40l/c/d of acceptable quality water from an improved source spending no more that 30 minutes per day Intermediate Basic service: people access a minimum of 20l/c/d of acceptable quality water from an improved source spending no more that 30 minutes per day Basic Sub-standard service: people access a service that is an improvement on having no service at all, but fails to meet the basic standard on one or more criteria Sub-standard No service No service: people access water from insecure or unimproved sources, or sources that are too distant, time consuming or are of poor quality
- 21. In Ghana, communities spend US$ 26 per capita per year on soap, more than the (annualised) per capita cost of US$ 10-14 a year for a small town water system. In Mozambique, households are spending up to 5% of their cash-income on soap. This is equivalent to an average of US$ 12 per capita per year, more than the per capita expenditure on hygiene promotion interventions.
Editor's Notes
- We’ve identified costs to collect
- WASHCost is doing pioneering work to describe service delivery models and the costs and the service levels achieved for that model. We cannot cost service levels with the amount of data that we have.
- We cannot cost steps on the service delivery ladder…Shows a ladder we want to climb: good for inspiration and advocacyBut there are lot of other conditions necessary for a good service
- Hard to link cost components to service levels. Same as slide 12
- Service delivered vs accessed. 15% 50% in a small town (GHA). BKF is the negative version (but they haven’t tried to look in each village who’s primary source is the borehole).Can’t apply small town system to rural area, small town growing may do better to have a piped systemCosting service delivery approaches