This blog is a response to the video posted by Matt Damon, co-founder of water.org, where he announces a toilet strike to raise awareness for the water crisis.
——-
Dear Matt,
I enjoyed your video on water.org about going on a toilet strike. It is great that you are so passionate about realizing access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene for all. I personally also like it that you bring in some humor into our sometimes very boring sector.
In your video you mention that it costs $25 USD to provide a person with sanitation for life. This is not true. Over the past four years IRC’s WASHCost project in Burkina Faso, Ghana, Andhra Pradesh (India) and Mozambique has collected, validated and analysed cost and service level information for water, sanitation and hygiene. Based on this research we know that for $ 25 USD you can construct a traditional pit latrine with an impermeable slab which provides a basic service. In order to sustain the service provided by that traditional pit latrine it costs between $ 1.5 and $ 4 USD per person per year – so to provide sanitation for life means finding that 1.5-4USD every year …. for life. If you do not know how, or by who, these recurrent costs will be financed, it is very likely that the latrine you are constructing today will break down or not used within two to three years, wasting your investment.
If you would like to know more about how you can better plan, budget and monitor for sustainable services, join our free online Costing Sustainable Services course. In this online course you can discuss with IRC staff and meet 600 water sector professionals from around the world interested in planning and budgeting for sustainable and equitable water, sanitation and hygiene services, using a life-cycle cost approach. The course is accessible 24 hours per day and you can follow it at your own pace so it is easy to combine with your other work.
Of course nothing beats a face-face exchanging of ideas, so you are always welcome to visit us at our office in The Hague, The Netherlands, or participate in one of our workshops on costing sustainable services. The next workshop is in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, on Friday 12 April connected to the Monitoring Sustainable WASH Service Delivery Symposium.
Hope to hear from you soon,
Kind regards,
Jeske Verhoeven
Programme Officer
IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre
Reblogged this on Rural Water Supply Network – Blog and commented:
An important debate: how much is the life cycle cost for sanitation (and water)
To be fair he said that the cost of providing water is 25 dollars – not sanitation… But I still believe this is an under estimate…
Thanks for your response! You are right. Matt refers to the costs of water for life. It is great that Matt is calling attention to the issue of sustainability and water, sanitation and hygiene services for all. In WASHCost research we found that there is a threshold of funds that needs to be allocated per person per year as a necessary condition for sustainability.
When using the WASHCost benchmarks, Matt’s US$ 25 will just cover construction and installation of a borehole and handpump (at 2011 prices). Our research suggests that the capital costs of preparing and installing a borehole and handpump (at 2011 prices) range from US$ 20 per person to just over US$ 60 per person. But to provide water for life, recurrent costs (covering operation and maintenance, capital maintenance and direct support) are far more than US$ 25. The costs that we found range from US$ 3-6 per person per year for boreholes and handpumps, and from US$ 3-15 per person per year for piped schemes.
For more information see Infosheet 3 – Funding recurrent costs for improved rural water services available at http://www.washcost.info/page/2584
While an important point, I’m sorry to say that I don’t agree with your numbers – USD 4 per person per year suggests that the toilet will have to be entirely rebuilt every year (assuming at least four members in a rural household), and even your minimum value implies USD 6 – 9 per year. A complete rebuild is possible in extreme cases, but by no means the usual practice (not least because the pit is rarely full after a year)? One of the reasons why poor households build simple latrines (and simple houses) is that they are cheap and easy to repair, often without recourse to market-bought materials and labour.
While it is true that many traditional and low-cost latrines have short life spans, the reasons behind the short lifespans are rarely due to high life-cycle costs!
Good point. The local context is very important in order to determine costs in developing countries. Many social, institutional and political aspects influence the level of services and value for money. However, we can say based on research in the WASHCost project with some confidence that if expenditure is much lower than the benchmarks presented here, then the services being planned or delivered have a high probability of being unsustainable. Costs are one of the key factors to ensure sustainability.
The WASHCost Benchmarks for sanitation services are calculated on the basis of sustaining the service for a period of 20 years. The 20-year cost of sustaining a basic level of service with a basic pit latrine in WASHCost research areas is US$ 30-80 per person after construction. That is more each year than the construction cost per person which ranges from US$ 1-4. For more information see WASHCost infosheet 2 – The cost of sustaining sanitation services for 20 years available at: http://www.washcost.info/page/2439
My question would be what type of service are the low-cost latrines that you mention providing?
Our cost benchmarks are based on the provision of a basic level of service (e.g the national government norm). For sanitation service levels, a basic level of service is achieved when all the following criteria have been realised by the majority of the population in the service area: At least some members of the household use a latrine with an impermeable slab at the house, in the compound or shared with neighbours. The latrine is clean even if it may require high user eff ort for pit emptying and other longterm maintenance. The disposal of sludge is safe and the use of the latrine does not result in problematic environmental impact.
Reblogged this on kitchinmebawa and commented:
I strongly believe that water and sanitation as big an issue as they are should be championed by all sectors of our society. Join Matt Damon to end the crisis.
More importantly, did Matt take you up on your offer and is coming to visit? (OK, not more importantly, but still ….)
Matt is scheduled to come to The Hague on World Water Day for a High-level Forum. AKVO & IRC have been asked to conduct live interviews, so hopefully …
[...] WASH ha generado una discusión bien animada. Te invitamos a unirte a la discusión en el blog de Finanzas WASH en inglés o aquí debajo de esta entrada del blog de noticias sobre WASH para América Latina en [...]
To be honest, who cares if he is right or if he is wrong. Matt is doing the sector (and more importantly the unserved) a favour by advocating and all he gets is quibbling via this blog and Twitter. WASH Cost and LCCA is of some importance for professionals, but don’t shoot at someone outside the sector trying to do his bit. He might just say blow you lot, I’ll go and do something where I don’t get shot at.
If the WASH sector had done its job properly, it might have some grounds for criticism…
Dear Peter,
Matt Damon has been in the water sector since 2006 when he set up the H2O Africa Foundation. His foundation merged with WaterPartners in 2009 to form Water.org, of which he is co-founder and acts as spokesperson. In that capacity he has been invited to participate in the WWD High-level Panel. Is it too much to ask him to be honest about what it costs to provide safe water for life?
The WASH sector has a dismal record, but also a long list of celebrity supporters starting with Mother Teresa in 1976. At the 1st HABITAT conference in Vancouver she co-led a “walk for water” of over 10,000 people in support of clean drinking water for the world’s urban poor. And nearly 40 years later we are still walking – http://www.worldwalksforwater.org/
Cor Dietvorst
Fair comment re him not being a newcomer Cor. There are a heap of targets re non or poor performace in the WASH sector and he is not near the top of mine!
It is of course more about shameless “celebrity-jacking” for awareness-raising and debate rather than targeting the great man himself..