4 only with the prove of a working / efficient service chain sceptics of alternative sanitation can be convinced that these are competitive /sustainable solutions.
5 why are donors / financers willing to pay 16,000,000 EUR for a piped sewerage system with central treatment plant but reluctant to pay 4,000,000 EUR to cover the same population with household toilets? [emphasis mine -Mathew]
I feel that as much effort / money should be put into the implementation of an on-site sanitation service chain (awareness creation / user training -household toilet – collection service – treatment /composting/storage facility – marketing /disposal) as would be put into conventional sewers with central waste water treatment.
How can donors / financers/ governments be convinced to finance household toilets out of project funds, either as full grant, part subsidy or as full loan, so that toilets are constructed at once and therefore ensure that the rest of the service chain is fully operational and eventually economical at once?
As central sewerage is not always feasible and we are looking for
alternative sanitation solutions to achieve the MDGs, we have not only to
adapt the technical aspects but also the financing mechanism.kind regards
Hajo Schaefer
Advisor Water Sector DevelopmentMTUWASA – Mtwara Urban Water Supply and Sewerage Authority
P.O. Box 141 – Mtwara – Tanzania
Tanzanian Frustration with Infrastructure Funding
This is a quotation from the EcoSanRes discussion list. It hits the central issue of sewer systems, we’re willing to pay more for less, because we have a cultural preference for water-borne sanitation, regardless of applicability:
