Designing Water Supply and Sanitation Projects

Designing water supply and
sanitation projects
to meet demand
the engineer’s role
Inception Report
Ian Smout and Paul Deverill
June 2000
Water, Engineering and Development Centre

Loughborough University Leicestershire
LE11 3TU UK
Designing water supply and sanitation projects to meet demand: inception report:
June 2000
Contents
1. Introduction to project............................................1
1.1 Description of project outputs..............................................................1
1.2 Structure of Inception Report...............................................................2
2. Project activities....................................................3
2.1 Literature review..................................................................................3
2.2 Field research with project collaborators.............................................3
2.3 Review group.......................................................................................3
2.4 Research reports...................................................................................3
2.5 Guidelines............................................................................................4
3. Review of project methodology...............................5

3.1 Work to date.........................................................................................5
3.2 Key changes to project methodology...................................................5
3.3 Workplan..............................................................................................7
4. Key issues arising from literature review.................8

4.1 Scope....................................................................................................8
4.2 Designing for demand: general implications ......................................8
4.3 Water supply .....................................................................................10
4.4 Sanitation...........................................................................................11
4.5 Poverty focus.....................................................................................12
5. Proposed dissemination strategies........................14

5.1 Expected target audiences..................................................................14
5.2 Dissemination methodologies............................................................14
Table of contents......................................................2
1. Introduction.........................................................4
2. Why design for demand?.......................................5

2.1 What is demand?................................................................................6
2.2 Demand responsive approaches.........................................................6
2.3 Implications for the engineer.............................................................7
3. Demand assessment and WTP...............................9

3.1 Demand assessment techniques.........................................................9
3.2 Informing demand..............................................................................10
2
June 2000
3.3 Responding to informed demand ....................................................12

3.4 Summary: implications for the engineer..........................................13
4. Demand responsive water supply in practice........14

4.1 Information from ‘model’ approaches ............................................14
4.2 Key issues from the field.................................................................15
4.3 Summary .........................................................................................18
5. Demand responsive sanitation.............................20

5.1 Social marketing..............................................................................20
5.2 Strategic sanitation...........................................................................20
5.3 Perceived weaknesses of SSA ........................................................21
5.3 Informing demand with sanitation options........................................22
5.4 Summary............................................................................................24
6. Poverty 26
6.1 Designing for the poor.......................................................................26
6.2 Implications for practice....................................................................27
6.3 Poverty, demand assessment and the engineer’s role........................28
6.4 Summary............................................................................................30
7. Conclusions 31
Annex A: Updated project proposal A-1
Annex B: Research framework B-1
Annex C: Literature review C-1
Annex D: Draft terms of reference D-1
Annex E: Project Flyer E-1
3
1. Introduction to project
Designing water supply and sanitation projects to meet demand - the engineer's
role' is a Knowledge and Research (KaR) project funded by the Department for
International Development (DFID). The project is managed by the Water and
Engineering Development Centre (WEDC), and involves input from both
independent consultants and four collaborating organisations: the Mvula Trust
(South Africa), Oxfam GB (Tanzania), NEWAH (Nepal) and UNICEF
(Madhya Pradesh and Orissa in India). The Department of Water Affairs and
Forestry of South Africa (DWAF) is also a key stakeholder as a proportion of
the research funds are coming from a joint project with DFID (South Africa).
The purpose of the project, as set out in the project logframe, is to 'produce
practical guidelines which will enable watsan staff to offer rural and peri-urban
communities, especially the poor, informed choices of upgradable levels of
service and technologies'.
1.1 Description of project outputs
The project outputs consist of the following:
 An in-depth research report reviewing current international practices and

promising approaches to designing both water and sanitation projects to
meet demand. This work will be informed by detailed case studies and
lessons learnt from around the world and in particular from the project
collaborators. If required, specific tools and processes identified by the
research as potentially useful may be tested and developed by the project
collaborators.
 Detailed report concerning the identification and participation of the poor in
case study projects. This work is to be focused on Oxfam's current work in
Tanzania, but will also be informed by other projects and the experiences of
the other collaborators.
 A guideline booklet on designing water supply and sanitation projects for
demand. This is to be a practical document for engineers involved in
implementing projects. It will be produced in draft form, and reviewed in a
number of workshops with the project collaborators. Collaborators will be
encouraged to use and monitor the guidelines.
 One or more papers which will be presented at the 26th WEDC conference
in Dhaka and other international fora.
June 2000
1.2 Structure of Inception Report
This inception report provides an up to date picture of how the project stands in
May 2000. Key changes are reflected in an updated Scope of Work (Section 3
of the KAR contract), which is attached in Annex A.
Section 2 of this Inception Report summarises the project activities and section
3 consists of a review of project methodology. A new project work plan has
been included in the updated Scope of Work. The project methodology is based
on a detailed research framework that is attached at Annex B.
Key issues arising from the literature review are developed in Section 4. The
literature review itself is attached as Annex C.
Draft terms of reference with Mvula Trust and Oxfam Tanzania are attached at
Annex D, and a flyer produced as part of the project's dissemination strategy is
at Annex E.
2
June 2000
2. Project activities
The following major activities were identified in the Scope of Work, an

updated version of which has been attached at Annex A.
2.1 Literature review
The literature review draws on published papers, reports and existing project
documentation, and has identified key areas for research. The literature review
has been used to develop a detailed research framework and identify key areas
for further investigation.
2.2 Field research with project collaborators
Dialogue has been initiated with the four project partners, with the initial aim
of agreeing terms of reference for their collaboration. The collaboration is to
take two forms: a) identifying, investigating and recording case studies and b)
identifying and testing and monitoring potentially useful approaches. In order
to ensure an adequate degree of buy in, the specific needs and interests of each
collaborator are being identified. Dialogue will be maintained with
collaborators throughout the project to exchange ideas and report on progress.
In Tanzania, a particular focus of the collaboration concerns the identification

and participation of poor groups in demand responsive projects. Simon Bibby,
a social development consultant, will be primarily responsible for this aspect of
the project.
2.3 Review group
A project review group is to be established in order to review the outputs

produced. The group will consist of about eight experts, with a range of
experience in terms of their interests, sector involvement (i.e. government,
NGO, international organisation or the private sector) and geographical
knowledge.
2.4 Research reports
The lessons learnt from the field will be combined with material from other
key projects and that identified by the literature review to form the basis of the
two research reports concerning designing for demand and the participation of
the poor. Both reports are due to be completed by January 2001.
3
June 2000
2.5 Guidelines
Work will start on preparing draft guidelines once the field visits have been
completed. Key components of the guidelines will be discussed with project
partners. The draft guidelines are due to be completed by February 2001. Local
workshops are being planned with each collaborator to review the completed
guidelines. Following this, collaborators will be encouraged to field test the
guidelines on particular projects and monitor the results. It is intended to
complete the final version of the guidelines by August 2001.
4
June 2000
3. Review of project methodology
3.1 Work to date
Final approval for the project was given by DFID in December 1999. However,
with the departure of the principal WEDC Research Associate involved (see
below), work was slow in the early months and started in earnest in March
2000. To date the following has been achieved:
 A research framework has been developed (Annex B). This document

establishes key focus areas for the research, the factors involved, how the
research is to be conducted and any specific opportunities that have been
identified. Some comments on the framework have been received from
collaborators and it has been refined accordingly. Its development has also
been guided by the literature review.
 The literature review has been completed (Annex C). Key findings are
discussed in Section 4. The review has helped identify a number of key
projects from which lessons can undoubtedly be learnt. Details of these are
now being collated.
 Dialogue has been established with the project collaborators, and the
research framework used to identify key opportunities for their involvement.
Terms of reference have been agreed with Mvula Trust and prepared in draft
format for Oxfam in Tanzania (Annex D). Terms of reference for the
participation of NEWAH and UNICEF will be prepared in June.
 Thought is being given to the dissemination strategy, which is recognised as

a key part of the project. A flyer has been produced (Annex E) to publicise
the project, and a website will shortly be established. Local and regional
dissemination strategies will be discussed with project collaborators during
the field research.
3.2 Key changes to project methodology
3.2.1 Links with other projects
The most significant change to the methodology proposed is a plan to make

increased use of case studies, other than those associated with our
collaborators. It is intended to identify and develop links with key projects,
with the aim of learning lessons and disseminating ideas. This is to be tied in
with the project website. To facilitate dialogue, the former Demand Responsive
Approach (DRA) mail list may be re-established.
5
June 2000
The project will also benefit by establishing links with related research work
currently being undertaken. The following research projects have been
identified as being potentially very useful in this respect:
DFID KaR 'Cost Recovery in Water and Sanitation Projects' managed by

Environmental Resources Management (ERM) Ltd. A meeting has been held
with ERM to discuss possible linkages. The need to ensure that guideline
outputs are consistent has been recognised. Dominic Waughray of ERM has
been identified as a member of the project review team.
DFID KaR 'Price and service differentiation of utility watsan for the urban
poor' managed by WEDC. There is a clear need to link with this project, which
explores how urban water utilities can assess demand and market water supply
options to low income communities as part of a strategic marketing approach.
DFID KaR 'Guidelines for sustainable handpump projects in Africa' managed

by WEDC is just starting. Although focused on one technology in one region,
there are many issues of joint concern including the establishment of full life
costs for a number of handpumps.
UNDP/IRC Research 'Participation, Gender and Demand Responsiveness:

Making the links with impact and sustainability of WSS investments'. This
research is being undertaken as part of a five year global initiative on
participatory learning and action (PLA) by UNDP-World Bank. Common
areas of interest in this work concern the participation of the poor, participative
demand assessment techniques and the cross cutting issue of gender awareness
in water and sanitation projects.
3.2.2 Change of personnel
Sarah Parry-Jones, originally the principal WEDC research associate with

responsibilities for the project, has now been replaced by Paul Deverill. This
contributed to the slow project start. Paul has experience of working with
Mvula Trust in South Africa and also has experience of working in Orissa. The
Scope of Work has been amended accordingly.
The team is otherwise unchanged:
 Ian Smout (project manager)

 Paul Deverill (water supply and sanitation engineer)
 Kevin Sansom (institutional specialist)
 Sue Coates (hygiene promotion and human resource development specialist)
 Simon Bibby (social development specialist)
 Alison Poole (environmental economist).
6
June 2000
3.3 Workplan
An updated workplan has included as part of the revised Scope of Work

(Annex A). This reflects the delayed start date. It is still planned to complete
the project by August 2001.
The field research is a key element of the work plan. The following dates have
been planned:
Country Visit dates WEDC person involved
South Africa 8 – 31 May 2000 Paul Deverill

8 – 24 May 2000 Alison Wedgwood
Tanzania 15 Jul - 3 Aug 2000 Paul Deverill

17 - 28 Jul 2000 Simon Bibby
Nepal 14 Aug - 4 Sep Paul Deverill

2000
India 18 Sep - 6 Oct Paul Deverill
7
June 2000
4. Key issues arising from literature review
4.1 Scope
The scope of this section is to extract and develop key issues identified by the
literature review (Annex C), rather than to repeat its conclusions.
4.2 Designing for demand: general implications
The literature supports the fact that responding to demand improves both the
use and the sustainability of water and sanitation projects. It is household
demand, rather than the demand of a representative body such as a village
committee, which needs to be responded to. The research shows that household
demand, expressed as willingness to pay (WTP), may vary considerably within
a community (Sara, 1998)
Demand needs to be informed before it can be expressed. This applies not only
to level of service, expressed in terms of characteristics based on household
perceptions and values, but also how that service is delivered. It also applies to
every phase in the planning cycle: selection of options, planning, construction,
operation and maintenance. The benefits and costs (the latter including
financial and non-financial inputs such as labour, time and materials) of each
option must be presented clearly, accurately and honestly. Of crucial
importance is the associated financial system for paying contributions,
upgrading charges and tariffs. If in overall terms the costs outweigh the
perceived benefits, it is unlikely that households will change from their current
system.
Sanitation is fundamentally different to water supply because in most cases the

cost exceeds people's (unmodified) perceptions of benefits. In this case,
demand has to be created rather than informed. Demand creation is achieved
through actively identifying, promoting and marketing positive perceptions of
sanitation, such as privacy and status, to a clearly defined 'target audience'.
Information regarding options form part of that process.
In the broadest terms, the role of engineers in designing for demand is thus
twofold, based on the need to:
a) inform demand and work with other disciplines as necessary to create

demand, and
b) respond to demand and come up with options that are either based on or
capture WTP.
8
June 2000
The process is iterative, involving dialogue between households and technical

staff. The process is often incremental, in that the 'final' solution is developed
in steps, starting with a number of options and ending up with an integrated
financial and managerial package that concerns the whole project cycle.
In terms of demand responsive approaches (in the plural, reflecting that there is
no blue print) a number of questions remain unanswered:
 If household demand is critical, to what extent can this be aggregated

through a process of social intermediation, without 'losing' it altogether?
 In the same context, the role of women in both water and sanitation projects
is crucial. Ignoring this can lead to a project failing to meet its objectives in
terms of the use of facilities and their sustainability. By focusing on WTP
and household demand, it is easy to focus on men. How should the needs
and associated demand of women be established and reflected in the final
design? The literature review will be extended to help address this issue.
 It is clear that demand responsive approaches require not only technical

inputs, but a high degree of social development, intermediation and
facilitation. Are these skills available and if they are not, what can be done?
 In the same context, how should responsibilities be defined? Who, for

example, is responsible for establishing financial and managerial options?
 The process of informing and responding to demand is more complex than a

top down supply driven approach. What are the implications for the cost of
projects and the time required to implement them? How can cost-effective
solutions be identified, bearing in mind the link between quality of
engineering and the sustainability of the project?
There are also a number of implications for engineers in particular:
 In order to capture household demand, a range of technical and delivery

options need to be identified, developed and presented. This implies that
engineers will need to consider technologies and approaches with which
they may not be familiar.
 Engineers will have to work with social intermediaries to present the

characteristics of different options, based on the perceptions of households.
It is not clear from the literature how this is achieved. For example, how do
engineers assist with the preparation of sanitation ladders and other
participative tools that inform potential users of characteristics and costs of
different options? Engineers must also accept that non-technical issues may
have a considerable impact on the final design adopted. The acceptability of
this situation to many 'conventional' engineers is questionable.
9
June 2000
 Options must be fully costed, not only in financial terms but also in terms of
any non-financial costs such as time and voluntary labour. The cost of
procuring materials, spares and technical assistance will also vary
considerably from location to location, and 'hidden' costs such as the need to
periodically deepen a well or empty a toilet pit should also be presented.
There is little evidence confirming that information of this type is
accessible, or that systems (e.g. checklists) have been established to
facilitate its formulation. Methods by which costs can be established and
presented to communities must be researched, while recognising that
operators may pass on costs to consumers in various ways (mobile phones
provide a good example).
4.3 Water supply
The literature review identified a number of key issues concerning the

implementation of water supply using demand responsive approaches.
In rural areas in particular, water is needed for a variety of domestic and non-
domestic purposes, and several sources may be used. Some of these purposes
and sources may vary seasonally. Income levels also vary according to the
availability of work. All of these factors influence WTP, yet it is unclear how
this is captured through demand assessment. In some projects, it clearly is not,
as demonstrated by the seasonal return of some households to traditional water
sources (for example, DFID 1998 and Breslin 1999).
Whilst designing for demand is clearly needed, engineers must balance demand
with supply. Specifically, the sustainable yield of the supply can be a limiting
factor and must be considered. This is especially so after the project is
completed and the population grows, or householders upgrade to a higher level
of service associated with increased consumption. Such factors must be
reflected in the design of the project.
As already implied, the design adopted must meet demand throughout the
project's life. There is a need to investigate how demand assessment and other
tools can be used to predict future demand. At the same time, it is also clear
that the managerial capacity of the water committee or equivalent organisation
must be able to manage future demand. This can be facilitated through project
design (by the use of engineering, financial tools and participatory techniques
that promote understanding of the problem).
There is evidence that many engineers lack the ability or desire to identify and
develop non-conventional options, especially low cost options. To an extent,
this may also reflect rigid design and water quality standards. Experience
suggests that insufficient attention is given to investigating the potential to
improve and replicate existing water supplies. Technical options may include
10
June 2000
in-house water treatment and improved methods of transporting water. In order

to be able to offer a menu of feasible options, engineers must have the ability,
willingness, time and budget to identify these.
Alternative systems for operation and maintenance (O&M) must also be

considered. Some reports highlight the problem of O&M systems failing in the
long term, when there is a major failure or a piece of equipment simply wears
out. O&M is a fundamental and integral aspect of any technological option
(IRC, 1997). In presenting technical options, the responsibilities of primary and
secondary stakeholders must be agreed at an early stage in order that these
options can be realistically appraised.
One issue that is not adequately covered in the literature review as it stands is
risk. If communities are to appraise options, they must appreciate the
associated risk of failure that they may be exposing themselves to, both in the
future (e.g. if a water table falls) or during implementation (e.g. if a drilling rig
fails to find water). This is particularly true if the community is contributing to
capital costs.
4.4 Sanitation
The main difference between sanitation and water supply is that there is usually
existing demand for the latter and little if any for the former. Demand for
sanitation has therefore to be created, based on promoting perceived benefits
rather than the promise of improved health, which is in any case dependent on
many other factors.
Engineers still have the dual task of informing demand and responding to it.
The difference is that in the case of sanitation, initial demand is at a much
lower level. Secondly, whereas engineers and consumers have a relatively
common understanding of the characteristics of water supplies (e.g. location,
quantity and reliability though perceptions of quality may differ), this cannot
be said of sanitation. Issues such as culture and belief may be highly important,
whilst what is private and comfortable to an engineer may be public and highly
uncomfortable to a potential user. The issues of gender and age come into play.
For example, if children are to be encouraged to use a toilet, it must be
designed accordingly.
In presenting options, all this must be taken into account. Engineers are as
likely to be responding to people's perceptions of comfort and status by
working out an appropriate toilet seating arrangement, as establishing the basic
technology to be used.
In presenting technical options, the literature confirms the importance of

investigating current practice. Many engineers have a bias against systems with
which they are unfamiliar (Mara, 1999). For example, the ventilated improved
11
June 2000
pit latrine is promoted, but the more affordable sanplat is not considered. What
to do when a pit is full must also be considered, together with their associated
costs. Different methods of implementation should be presented as options, for
example, on site fabrication or the centralised construction of toilet slabs.
It must be recognised that sanitation can have a major environmental impact,

which can in turn affect others. When households are informed of the choices
open to them, this must also be considered. For example, the use of septic tanks
in a peri-urban area, discharging effluent into open storm drains, may have a
profound impact on 'downstream' households.
The important point was made during the electronic conference on strategic
sanitation that demand responsive approaches may too easily ignore the
importance of promoting changes in behaviour associated with improved
hygiene (Blackett, 1999). This is something that needs further investigation,
and in particular, the use of participatory approaches such as PHAST1 to get
appropriate hygiene messages across whilst promoting sanitation. The fact that
women seem to be more responsive to this type of approach than men is
important.
4.5 Poverty focus
The literature review confirms that poor groups within communities are rarely
identified and targeted by water supply or sanitation programmes, whether
these are demand responsive or not. Without this, demand responsive
approaches in particular are likely to exclude and further marginalise the poor.
For this reason, there is a key need to focus on the poor.
At the same time, it is also apparent that in many cases the poor are paying a
great deal for water, albeit possibly at the expense of their food budget. The
implication is that poor people within communities are often willing to pay
something for a reliable service that meets their needs.
It is clear that the poor must be identified and included in demand responsive
approaches, and that their WTP is captured with appropriate options and
delivery methods. There may also be opportunities for cross subsidy at
community level, indeed, this is something that has occurred in some rural
water supply projects. More investigation is needed in order to establish how
'financial solutions' of this sort can be presented.
1
PHAST: Participatory Hygiene and Sanitation Transformation: an adaptable and flexible approach
developed by UNDP in the early 1990s based on participatory learning through mostly graphical
techniques adapted to meet the specific circumstances of a community.
12
June 2000
Poverty is often invisible and explicit monitoring systems should be introduced

to inform implementation staff of the impact of the project in this respect (IRC,
1999). A checklist has been proposed to do this.
13
June 2000
5. Proposed dissemination strategies
5.1 Expected target audiences
5.1.1 Engineers
The guidelines are primarily intended for use by engineers and other technical
staff at programme or project level. In terms of institutional involvement -
private, government or NGO, that depends largely on the country concerned.
For example, in South Africa, there are relatively few NGOs, with water
supply projects being implemented by private companies or consortia. In other
countries, NGO or Government takes the lead.
5.1.2 Other Project Staff
Implementing demand responsive projects inevitably requires engineers to

work closely with other professionals. For example, a project involving
participative demand assessment could often require the skills of a social
development expert. Similarly, tariff design may require input from an
economist. It is vital that the guidelines produced are accessible for non-
engineers, in order that the team involved is informed of the engineer's role in
what should be an integrated, iterative and transparent process. For the same
reason, an overview of non-engineering activities, such as demand assessment,
should be included in the guidelines, showing how they fit into the project
process. Seen in this way, the guideline will also be a valuable tool for project
and programme managers. The overall emphasis, however, is centred on the
engineer's role.
5.1.3 Policy makers
Whilst primarily directed at implementing agencies, it is important the

guidelines, or at very least the principles contained within them, are accessible
to policy makers and intermediate staff. Frequently these will be government
staff, increasingly responsible for assessing proposals or facilitating,
monitoring and evaluating projects. This audience may need an additional
section or summary, either as part of the document or as a complementary
volume.
5.2 Dissemination methodologies
Dissemination relates both to how the information is presented within the

guidelines and how the guidelines are introduced to the target audiences.
Clearly, in order to be practical, the final document must be relatively small,

robust and readable. Its content (and binding) must be flexible enough to
14
June 2000
accommodate specific-to-country themes. This is especially important if the

buy-in of our project partners, and the document's local impact, is to be
maximised. For example, the technical options for rural water supply in South
Africa include a variety of sophisticated prepayment systems, which are not
applicable elsewhere. Such differences cannot be ignored. Flexibility would
also be useful if a supplementary volume or section is to be included for policy
makers and intermediaries (see above).
To ensure both buy-in and applicability, it is important that potential users of

the guidelines are closely involved with their development. This process is
facilitated by access to e-mail. When in draft form, it is intended to workshop
the guidelines in each 'partner country'. How this is done is best worked out
with the collaborating organisations. For example, in South Africa, a number of
regional workshops, associated with an existing programme, may provide the
best solution. The cost implications will need to be established.
Dissemination does not start with a draft set of guidelines but is seen as an on-
going process of development and information exchange. In this context, the
flyer at Annex E should be seen as part of the project's dissemination strategy.
References:
Blackett, I. (1999) Where is the health aspect to the strategic sanitation
approach? Contribution to electronic debate on strategic sanitation, 28 October
1999 http: //www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/gesi/.
Breslin, N. (1999) Lessons From the Field: Rethinking community

management for sustainability: Rural and peri-urban water supply and
sanitation in South Africa - appropriate practice conference East London
March 1999.
DFID (1998) Mid-term output to purpose review: Oju and Obi LGA water and
sanitation project DFID West and North Africa Department, October 1998.
IRC (1997) Linking technology choice with operation and maintenance for low
cost water supply and sanitation. Operation and maintenance working group of
Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council, IRC The Hague 1997.
IRC (1999) Discussion paper: Demand responsive programming and equity: a

discussion paper for the water and sanitation sector:
http://www.irc.nl/home/comm/demand.htm 1999.
Mara, D. (1999) Peri-urban sanitation Contribution to electronic debate on

strategic sanitation, 13 October 1999 http: //www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/gesi/.
15
June 2000
Sara, J. and Katz, T. (1998) Making rural water supply sustainable: report on
the impact of project rules UNDP WSP 1998.
16
ANNEX C
Designing water and sanitation projects to

meet demand – the engineer’s role
Literature Review
Designing water supply and sanitation projects to meet demand: literature review:
June 2000
Table of contents
1. Introduction to project............................................1
1.1 Description of project outputs..............................................................1
1.2 Structure of Inception Report...............................................................2
2. Project activities....................................................3
2.1 Literature review..................................................................................3
2.2 Field research with project collaborators.............................................3
2.3 Review group.......................................................................................3
2.4 Research reports...................................................................................3
2.5 Guidelines............................................................................................4
3. Review of project methodology...............................5

3.1 Work to date.........................................................................................5
3.2 Key changes to project methodology...................................................5
3.3 Workplan..............................................................................................7
4. Key issues arising from literature review.................8

4.1 Scope....................................................................................................8
4.2 Designing for demand: general implications ......................................8
4.3 Water supply .....................................................................................10
4.4 Sanitation...........................................................................................11
4.5 Poverty focus.....................................................................................12
5. Proposed dissemination strategies........................14

5.1 Expected target audiences..................................................................14
5.2 Dissemination methodologies............................................................14
Table of contents......................................................2
1. Introduction.........................................................4
2. Why design for demand?.......................................5

2.1 What is demand?................................................................................6
2.2 Demand responsive approaches.........................................................6
2.3 Implications for the engineer.............................................................7
3. Demand assessment and WTP...............................9

3.1 Demand assessment techniques.........................................................9
3.2 Informing demand..............................................................................10
3.3 Responding to informed demand ....................................................12
3.4 Summary: implications for the engineer..........................................13
C-2
June 2000
4. Demand responsive water supply in practice........14

4.1 Information from ‘model’ approaches ............................................14
4.2 Key issues from the field.................................................................15
4.3 Summary .........................................................................................18
5. Demand responsive sanitation.............................20

5.1 Social marketing..............................................................................20
5.2 Strategic sanitation...........................................................................20
5.3 Perceived weaknesses of SSA ........................................................21
5.3 Informing demand with sanitation options........................................22
5.4 Summary............................................................................................24
6. Poverty 26
6.1 Designing for the poor.......................................................................26
6.2 Implications for practice....................................................................27
6.3 Poverty, demand assessment and the engineer’s role........................28
6.4 Summary............................................................................................30
7. Conclusions 31
C-3
June 2000
1. Introduction
This literature review draws on information from both formal and informal
sources. This is a reflection of the fact that the project concerns the
identification of good and bad practice as well as established theory. Much use
has been made of contributions to two recent electronic conferences, the first
concerning demand responsive approaches to water supply and sanitation, the
second concerning strategic sanitation.
The review is structured in seven sections. Section 2 provides an overview of

demand and demand responsive approaches. Section 3 specifically looks at
demand assessment, its relevance, and the role of the engineer in both
informing demand and responding to it. Section 4 and 5 consider water supply
and sanitation issues respectively, based very much on practical experience and
case studies. Section 6 looks specifically at the implications of designing for
demand on poverty. Conclusions are made in Section 7.
C-4
June 2000
2. Why design for demand?
In 1992, in a review of experience gained during the International drinking

water supply and sanitation decade, Sandy Cairncross concluded: ‘The
principal lesson is that progress and continuing success depend most on
responding to consumer demand’ (Cairncross, 1992).
In writing this, Cairncross was drawing on lessons learnt from many successful
and unsuccessful projects implemented throughout the 1980’s. It was observed
that water and sanitation systems which did not meet people’s demands had
problems of under-use, poor maintenance and poor cost recovery. As such they
were not sustained (White, J. 1997). Other studies have shown that consumers
may be willing to pay (WTP) substantially more for higher levels of service
than that they were actually receiving (Altaf and Hughes 1994).
In sanitation, it is now widely recognised that providing infrastructure in itself

has little impact. What is important is the extent that facilities are used and
what they are used for. Many examples have been provided of toilets being
used for, among other times, storage facilities, bathing cubicles even and
keeping chickens (Smout et al, 1997). In order that toilets are used as intended,
there is now a considerable body of evidence that demand for sanitation has
first to be created, based on building on people’s felt needs and perceptions.
Although being ‘responsive to consumer demand’ is the key to progress and

continuing success of both water supply and sanitation projects, it is also clear
that there are many different interpretations of what the word ‘demand’
actually means. Treating water and sanitation as economic goods signifies they
are commodities with an associated demand exercised by consumers. Demand
is expressed as willingness to pay (WTP) which can be measured. These
statements reflect an economic view of demand. Parry-Jones (1999)
summarises how different professionals - engineers, economists and
sociologists, can see demand from quite different viewpoints (Box 1).
Box 1: Demand as a concept
What does demand actually mean?
• To economists: WTP for a particular level of service

• To social scientists: a basic need or human right that must be addressed in the context
of poverty, equity and the empowerment of low income groups.
• To engineers: the amount of water needed to supply a population.
(Parry-Jones 1999)
C-5
June 2000
2.1 What is demand?
In overall terms, it would seem that most practitioners view demand as having
both economic and social components, and agree that by responding to
demand, projects have an improved chance of being sustainable. The key issue
is how to achieve this in practice in an equitable way. (Sara, 1999). Certainly
the previous rule of thumb often employed by engineers, that communities will
pay 5% of their income for an improved water supply has been shown to be
erroneous (World Bank 1993, White, J. 1997).
2.2 Demand responsive approaches
Implementation methods that capture demand in order to improve the potential

sustainability of a project are all by definition demand responsive. It is clear
from the literature and many informal accounts of projects that there is no
agreed method of measuring, interpreting and reacting to demand. The
approach adopted will inevitably reflect both local circumstances and the
ideology of the agency involved. It therefore makes sense to refer to degrees of
demand responsiveness: ‘The degree to which a project is demand driven
depends on who makes the decisions about the type and level of service and
what range of decisions the user makes (instead of having decisions made for
them’. Garn (1998)
This issue of their being no single blue print approach is made more
complicated by the development and advocacy of the ‘demand responsive
approach’ (DRA) by the World Bank. It can be seen as a generic model that in
practice has been adopted, adapted and used by many international donors and
implementing agencies, for example, the Mvula Trust in South Africa.
The key characteristics of DRA have been identified as:
 the community initiates and makes informed choices about service options,
based on its WTP for services and acceptance of responsibility for
subsequent operation and maintenance;
 the community contributes to investment costs relative to level of service
and has significant control over how funds are managed;
 there is an adequate flow of information to the community as well as
procedures for facilitating collective action;
 communities can choose how goods and services are delivered and how
water and sanitation services are managed;
 government has a facilitative role, sets clear national policies and strategies
and creates an enabling environment;
 the community or representative body owns and is responsible for
sustaining its facilities;
C-6
June 2000
 community capacity is appropriately strengthened; and

 innovation is promoted and the need for flexibility recognised.
(Rall 1999)
To date, relatively few projects have managed to translate all these
characteristics into actual practice. However, the World Bank has developed an
associated set of project rules and carried out a sophisticated study to examine
their influence on sustainability (Sara and Katz, 1998). This study concluded
that:
• sustainability was higher in communities where projects followed a demand
responsive approach; however, training and education, the presence of some
sort of community organization with managerial responsibilities and above all
the quality of construction were just as or more important in determining the
success of a scheme;
• the demand responsive approach influences sustainability more when it is

focused at household rather than at community level (as represented by a
traditional leader or committee);
• effective household involvement requires good information flow, implying the

need for well trained extension staff and support materials;
• flexible design standards are needed to capture community choice;
• the implementing organization had to be responsive to meet demand and

allow communities to decide for example how their funds are spent; and
• the cost sharing strategy should ensure that any community or household
contributions required reflect both capital and operational costs.
The study concerned water rather than sanitation projects, and made no
mention of the impact of DRA on the poor and other marginalized groups.
Neither did it investigate the relationship between gender and demand or
address environmental concerns. However, it is a valuable resource that
emphasises that if projects are to be sustainable, not only must they be demand
responsive but this must be backed up by good engineering and appropriate
training.
2.3 Implications for the engineer
Based on these findings, demand responsive approaches have number of

implications for engineers;
 engineers will have to provide households with a range of technical options
with their associated lifecycle costs rather than a single solution. This
implies the need for technical flexibility and adaptability;
C-7
June 2000
 these options will include not just level of service but options for how that
service will be delivered;
 to be able to do this, engineers will have to be informed by consumer
demand;
 determining and presenting a number of feasible options (rather than a
single option) is likely to require increased engineering inputs, which in
turn will result in increased costs;
 engineers must view users as consumers and communities as clients: this
implies that there may be two clients if one includes the funding
organisation;
 engineers will have to communicate directly or indirectly with households
rather focus on committees; and
 engineers will have to work more closely with social intermediaries and
other professionals and be willing to accept non-technical issues in the
determination of technical options.
C-8
June 2000
3. Demand assessment and WTP
3.1 Demand assessment techniques
The DFID guidance manual on water supply and sanitation is clear about the
use of demand assessment techniques: in its section on economic and financial
perspectives, it states: “At the centre of a demand responsive approach is the
process of demand assessment, used to ascertain what levels of service users
are willing and able to pay for “ (WELL 1998).
Just as demand means different things to different people, so does the term
‘demand assessment’. A range of techniques has been developed, with different
inputs, characteristics and outputs, and these are well documented by Parry
Jones (1997). The three main techniques are contingent valuation
methodologies (CVM), revealed preference (RP) or heuristic studies, and a
combination of various participatory techniques. These are described in the
following table.
Table 1: Comparison of demand assessment techniques
Characteristic CVM RP Participatory

Techniques
Methodology Detailed Detailed survey of Group discussions and
questionnaire to existing behaviour (e.g. exercises with trained
establish WTP for associated with water facilitator
number of options vendors)
Principle purpose Explicit determination Data on current use of Establish local
of WTP for improved existing system: perception, priorities
systems. provides information and solutions. Can
for planners to guide inform external agency
future investments and the community
itself.
Inputs needed Economist’s input to Trained enumerators Trained facilitator and
design questionnaire. participative tools.
Trained enumerators
Outputs provided WTP for particular Details of existing use Dependent on
(specifically related options and and functioning of techniques used and
to demand) economic status of services ability of facilitator.
respondents
Use Urban/peri-urban Most often for urban or Smaller scale rural
water and sanitation peri-urban water water and sanitation
projects supplies
C-9
June 2000
Characteristic CVM RP Participatory

Techniques
Disadvantages High cost of Does not directly Results can be biased:
specialised inputs. establish WTP for needs well trained
Data rarely gender potential options. facilitator.
disaggregated
Compatibility CVM determines maximum WTP and is theoretically difficult to match with
the WTP for a particular option deduced through a participatory exercise.
However, both WTP and participatory approaches can use RP surveys to
support data.
One potential disadvantage with participatory approaches is that community

meetings and PRA exercises can be ‘biased’ or opinions led by stronger
members of the community. Parry Jones makes the point that there is little
available information concerning the use of participative approaches to assess
demand in peri-urban areas. It is also clear that relatively few projects have
successfully applied demand assessment on the ground.
3.2 Informing demand
In terms of implementing new projects, both CVM and RP demand assessment

techniques have the capacity to give potential users information about the
characteristics, benefits and costs of different service and delivery options so
that they can make an informed choice. In every case study reviewed, this has
been attempted. How informing potential consumers is achieved and to what
extent this is done varies according to the situation and the demand assessment
technique that is being used.
When new services are planned, households must be informed of what options
they have. This has been achieved in a number of ways, including:
 by explaining to the householder the attributes of each option. The key point
here is that the attributes selected are based on user perceptions rather than
those of the implementing agency involved.
 by using demonstration facilities – this applies more to sanitation than water
supply (see Section 4); and
 the use of photographs or models;
 visits to other projects; and
 by using participatory tools such as the sanitation ladder originally
developed as part of the participatory hygiene and sanitation transformation
(PHAST) approach.
C-10
June 2000
The process of demand assessment is iterative and requires mutual trust, an

understanding of user perceptions and good communication. The degree of
iteration needed depends on the demand assessment technique adopted. For
example, a menu of technical and financial options with their life cycle costs
could be presented to households in the form of a water or sanitation ladder,
based on accurate knowledge of their perceptions and circumstances. Clearly,
there must be sufficient options if the demand of different groups within the
community concerned is to be captured. Further dialogue is likely to be
necessary before the final plan is agreed.
Alternatively, the characteristics of different options could be presented in

order to establish the WTP of a representative number of households. This
information is then used to come up with a technical solution that best meets
this demand.
Input from engineers is needed to inform households of options, costs and

benefits (an integral part of demand assessment) and then respond to the
information on demand received. How this can be done is explored in the
following two sections on water supply and sanitation.
WTP is not just influenced by the levels of service offered compared to what is
currently being used and the user’s perceptions of relative costs and benefits.
Research has shown many other issues are involved, including;
 the system of financing options;

 in the case of water supply, what the water is actually going to be used for
(and there are often several different uses, some of which may be seasonal);
 income levels, again, these are often seasonal or vary in some other way;
 the education level of the household and its various members;
 other prices, e.g. of electricity or food;
 the value ascribed to women’s time by men; and
 the credibility of the organisations involved at various levels.
(Source: UNDP 1997 and World Bank 1993)
Engineers will primarily be concerned with establishing a menu of different

levels of service and various mechanisms for their implementation. They must
also provide information on their associated costs and benefits. However,
engineers need to understand the importance and influence of other factors if
the most sustainable solution is to be identified. In particular, in the absence of
a better qualified professional, the engineer may well be required to come up
with various financial options.
C-11
June 2000
In many cases, it is the lack of appropriate financing systems for both private
connections to water supplies and for paying for sanitation which have
significantly reduced demand (Derbyshire and Vickers, 1997)
The DFID manual also makes the point that although demand assessment is
somewhat focused on WTP, it has a much wider application. A brief look at the
results of demand assessment exercises conducted in South Asia reveals the
information gathered has also been used to:
 highlight people’s perceptions of their current service, how it is delivered,

satisfaction levels, and the service which they require;
 highlight gender concerns and the high cost of the coping strategies of the
poor;
 design acceptable cost recovery systems based on household cash flow;
 establish acceptable tariffs that include elements of cross subsidisation;
 anticipate future demand for higher levels of service through incremental
development; and
 establish baseline data for future monitoring.
(Source: UNDP 1997)
In the literature, theory receives better coverage than practice. Parry Jones
identifies a number of grey areas in her report in this respect. There are few
examples illustrating the use of demand assessment for sanitation, where
demand has not just to be informed but created. In overall terms, there is little
information how the results of demand assessment exercises are aggregated
and used to design an equitable tariff structure. There is also doubt whether
elements of different demand assessment methods can be combined to form a
‘designer’ tool for a specific task.
3.3 Responding to informed demand
In his study of demand for water supply in South Africa, Webster (1999)
identifies a number of important relating to how engineers can respond to
demand
Firstly, designs and support systems have to be sufficiently flexible to

accommodate a number of different service levels to match demand.
Effectively the project is never complete but a dynamic model that is
responsive to changing demands of its users.
The project must be able to accommodate level of services which are upgraded
by users over time. In the South African context, this means an increasing
number of private connections and with it, increasing levels of consumption.
C-12
June 2000
An associated issue is how to estimate the extent of upgrading over the projects
‘design life’. There is evidence that demand assessment can assist in predicting
upgrading. A major factor that influences upgrading rates is the cost recovery
system associated with the connection charge.
Finally, the design must also be able to accommodate a increase in the number
of people using it. A case study described by Webster indicates that upgrading
and population growth may each result in a 250% increase in water
consumption over the project’s design life. This increase is significantly greater
than the range of consumption estimates based on demand assessment studies
(120%). The implication is that an engineer cannot afford to forget the
combined effects of population growth and upgrading.
What is not covered in the report is how best to phase out stand pipes as more
users switch to private connections, and how a community is expected to
manage demand some time in the project’s future when demand begins to
outstrip supply.
3.4 Summary: implications for the engineer
Effective demand assessment is central to a demand responsive approach.

Different techniques have been developed to suit different circumstances and
purposes, although as yet there is little evidence of their widespread
application. A common factor is that demand must be informed before it can be
assessed. The role of the engineer in this is two fold: to provide information for
informing consumers of the options they have and to respond to the resulting
demand. This is an iterative process often carried out over several stages.
The various options presented should be based on user perceptions. This

implies initial interaction between the engineer and a social intermediary. A
sufficient spectrum of options should be presented in order to capture varying
household demands.
Information on technical options can be presented in a number of ways

depending on the demand assessment techniques being used, and will include
characteristics, benefits and costs over the projects life cycle. Additional
options should be presented for the method of delivery and financial systems.
C-13
June 2000
4. Demand responsive water supply in

practice
4.1 Information from ‘model’ approaches
How to implement demand responsive water supply projects was the subject of
a World Bank conference on community water supply convened in Washington
in May 1998. The conference was informed by six ‘model’ approaches from
India, Indonesia, China, Bolivia, Ghana and South Africa. The key factors
mentioned by staff from the six projects have been tabulated below.
Table 2: Key factors identified by model approaches
Project Key factors mentioned

PROSABAR • flow of information to households could have been improved;
(Bolivia) • difficulties were encountered enforcing rules and to ensure messages are
consistent;
• community members (rather than community leaders) could have been
more involved in making informed choice re levels of service;
• training and the development of supporting manuals and plans needed a
higher priority;
• community members wanted to be more involved in managing
implementation and the selecting, contracting and monitoring of implementers;
• few efforts were made to identify the demand of women in the process;
• there was a lack of information re how to implement demand responsive
sanitation; and
• some of the agencies involved lacked participatory skills and concentrated
on building infrastructure.
IDA supported • demand was not fully captured in some projects where false economy led
projects to lower levels of service being provided than were actually wanted.
(China)
CWSP • despite the focus on a largely illiterate rural community, the demand
(Ghana) responsive approach adopted has led to a high level of user ownership;
• small town water boards and watsan committees proved to be successful;
and
• the demand for services is such that the private and NGO sectors have
insufficient capacity to meet it;
• poorer communities would benefit from the programme if technical options
were more varied and flexible; and
• there is little information concerning how sanitation was implemented.
SWAJAL • Swajal has a delivery system that includes government in a facilitating
(India) rather than an implementing role, a project management unit, NGOs acting as
intermediaries and eventually 1000 participating communities;
• it has proved difficult for the project to engage women in the decision
C-14
June 2000
making process; and

• the capacity of NGOs is patchy.
WSSLIC & VIP • some rules encouraged responsiveness to the demands of village leaders
(Indonesia) rather than households;
• under WSSLIC, communities were not given control of project
management, the project remaining in government hands until hand-over:
resulting in a reduced sense of user satisfaction and ownership; and
• in terms of quality, the best and worst projects were built by communities.
MVULA TRUST • up-front contributions are seen as critically important to project
(South Africa) sustainability;
• engineers often lack social and management skills required for social
mediation; and
• difficulties have been encountered forming representative committees for
larger communities.
(Source: World Bank, 1998)
When this evidence is compared to other case studies and comments made by
participants in the 1999 electronic conference on DRA, a number of common
issues emerge.
4.2 Key issues from the field
4.2.1 Appropriate implementation
An implementation model should be designed to meet the needs of local

circumstances. This will reflect the ideology and capacity of the agencies
involved. The World Bank has advocated particular roles for secondary
stakeholders (Sara, 1998). In some countries however, the private sector and
NGOs clearly do not yet have the capacity, or an appropriate regulatory
framework does not yet exist, for these sectors to undertake major
responsibilities for implementation.
4.2.2 Household demand
In practice, establishing household demand using participatory methods is

made more difficult because of the overriding authority of traditional leaders.
Individuals, committees and communities can be influenced by those with
traditional, political and material influence. This can result in demand being
unrepresentative. Often, the poor and women are excluded. Several of the
projects reviewed ended up responding to the demand of community leaders.
The scale of the project has a profound influence on the approach adopted.
Household demand is easier to elicit in smaller communities. In some cases,
however, technical options were identified only when communities were
clustered together (Box 2).
C-15
June 2000
Box 2: Hitosa water supply scheme, Ethiopia
The Hitosa Water Supply Scheme in southern Ethiopia provides water to more than 60,000
consumers. It was devised, designed and constructed by the government. Local people
provided 50,000 days of labour and 17% of the total cost of the project. The scheme is large but
not that complex. It was envisaged from the outset local organisations would be responsible for
managing the scheme. Despite being supply rather than demand led, the project is sustainable.
The project provides 63 public tap stands, each of which is equipped with a meter to check
against sales made by a tap attendant. Potential problems include the inevitable need to
replace the pipelines; cost recovery is not sufficient to finance this level of investment. The
water management board is voluntary and as such may itself not be sustainable.
(Source: Silkin 1998)
4.2.3 Consumer choice and technical options
Cost predictions associated with technical options should be honest, transparent

and accurate. There are many examples in which one or more technical options
have been offered with associated costs, but no information concerning how
these costs were arrived at.
Technical choice can be extended to look at improving or replicating existing

water sources. A research project in Zambia is currently investigating whether
improvement and replication of existing traditional sources can have an impact
and how this compares with more ‘conventional’ solutions. Initial results
indicate that traditional sources are not as unreliable as they are sometimes
presented (Mbewe and Sutton, 1999). Certainly, there are many examples of
new supplies being deserted in favour of traditional sources (an example of this
is described in Box 3).
In presenting a number of technical options it is vital that sufficient emphasis is

placed on their operation and maintenance (O&M) and management. O&M
and associated factors, for example, the local availability of spares, is a major
factor in determining long term sustainability and must therefore be integrated
with technology choice (IRC, 1997).
One fact which is understandably not often recorded is that engineers have
been known to present a number of technical options to meet criteria set down
in project rules, fully knowing that only one of these is technically feasible in
terms of the local scenario (Reed, B.J; personal communication).
C-16
June 2000
The issue of consumer choice often extends beyond level of service to include
how that service is delivered, when and by whom. In this context, presenting
several options for cost recovery seems important. Many communities pay for
breakdowns on an ‘as and when basis’, with little investment in preventative
maintenance. More research is needed in this area, and this research project
will benefit from its links with a second research project looking into this issue.
One important issue is the size of contribution to capital costs or its equivalent
in terms of labour or locally procured materials made by the community. The
amount is often fixed by project rules, and its collection is used by many
agencies as an indicator of demand. One example of this is the Mvula Trust
guidelines for water supply projects in South Africa. However, if the
contribution system favours one technical option over another, the community
may easily be influenced to opt for it. An example from RUWASA 1 in
Uganda indicates that communities may have chosen hand pumps rather than
spring protection because the up-front cash payment was smaller. A later
evaluation indicated that households were more willing to sustain springs
rather than handpumps, due to the difficulties and cost of getting handpump
spares (Deverill, 2000).
A point made by several participants in the electronic conference is that the

poor are not always presented with a choice of options due to the failure of
engineers to come up with low cost solutions that met their demands. The
technical bias of engineers was highlighted in a later electronic conference on
sanitation and is also evident in a number of water supply projects (Box 3).
Box 3: Technical bias: Oju and Obi water and sanitation project
DFID and WaterAid contracted BGS to undertake a detailed geological survey with the intention
of providing water from newly drilled boreholes. The focus of the project was for new facilities
and little attention was paid to rehabilitating existing facilities. There appears to have been no
attempt to examine or cost other alternatives, or provide information supporting the adoption of
boreholes. WTP was not investigated: the community was expected to make financial
contributions towards the cost of the borehole. Evidence suggests that current project facilities
are only used in the dry season, with households reverting to traditional sources during the wet
season.
(DFID 1998)
Technological choice can be restricted by standardisation, for example, of hand

pump types. Although standardisation can improve the local availability of
spares, it is obviously important that the infrastructure installed is locally
appropriate.
Consumer choice may be constrained by the ownership of land or water

sources, as well as the capacity of the supply. For example, the point was made
C-17
June 2000
that in some hill villages in Nepal, even if people want and are willing to pay
for private connections, they cannot as the supply is limited. In that case, only
one technical option was open to them (Trace, 1999). The environmental and
social (third party) consequences of adopting a demand responsive approach
must be considered, and if necessary demand management measures adopted to
ensure a sustainable, equitable supply can be maintained (Box 4).
Box 4: Water scarcity and the need for demand management
The Kolhapur water project in Maharastra has been operational since 1980. By 1981 there were
419 household connections and 70 public standpipes. By 1999, there were 1,723 private
connections and 43 public standpipes. To get a private connection, families pay a total of Rs
320 to the joint management body and a fixed annual charge of Rs200. As the pumps have
aged, their efficiency has decreased. Water consumption is limited by supply and pressure in
many parts of the system has fallen. The poor, who use the public standpipes, are particularly
affected.
In designing for demand, engineers must consider the future availability of water, especially
where private connections are being actively promoted and for which households are WTP. If
necessary, demand must be managed to ensure a reliable and equitable service can be
sustained.
(Wedgwood, 2000)
4.2.4 Gender
There was a general concern expressed in both the World Bank conference on
community water supply and the electronic conference on DRA which
followed, that women could easily be excluded in a demand responsive process
that was largely dependent on establishing WTP. There were few examples
demonstrating how to avoid this in practice. Women are key stakeholders in
water and sanitation projects, but financial decisions are usually taken by men.
Certainly, many CVM surveys reviewed do not disaggregate data. There is a
clear need to explore in detail how women can be actively involved and due
weight paid to their views in demand responsive water and sanitation projects.
A UNDP RSWG-SA project is looking into this area and it would make sense
to establish links with it2.
4.3 Summary
The following key points emerge from this section:
2
Participation, Gender and Demand Responsiveness: making the links with impact and
sustainability of WSS investments. A UNDP/IRC project in the participatory learning and
action (PLA) series of studies being undertaken by IRC.
C-18
June 2000
 establishing household demand is often made more difficult by the influence

of local elites;
 the responsibilities of different stakeholders must be agreed from the outset;
 the scale of the project has a major influence on the approach adopted and
techniques used;
 clustering villages together may result in additional options being identified,
but may make it more difficult to establish household demand;
 cost predictions should be honest, accurate and transparent; how costs are
determined and presented needs further investigation;
 engineers frequently exhibit a technical bias that may result in the adoption
of a particular technology: there seems to be a lack of knowledge or
acceptance of low cost solutions;
 technical options may often be limited by environmental and third party
effects; this may necessitate the adoption of demand management
techniques to ensure an equitable service can be sustained; and
 insufficient attention is given to the issue of gender and ensuring women are
consulted and their views are taken into full account: more information is
needed to establish how this can be achieved in practice.
C-19
June 2000
5. Demand responsive sanitation
5.1 Social marketing
Sanitation has remained a ‘second cousin’ to water supply since the beginning
of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation Decade in 1980. The
challenge continues to grow. WHO now estimate that more than 3 billion
people are without adequate means of excreta disposal. 3.3 million people die
every year from diarrhoeal diseases, the overwhelming majority being caused
by excreted human pathogens. (WELL 1998).
Demand for water supply has to be informed, but demand for sanitation often
has to be created from very low levels. Unlike water supply, sanitation is rarely
a household priority. Furthermore, to be effective, sanitation must include
elements of hygiene promotion if it is to be effective. The sustainable delivery
of sanitation is thus a complex issue, because it implies the need to change
human priorities and behaviour.
Building on recent experience, the DFID guidance manual advocates an

approach based on social marketing. In essence, the consumer is placed at the
heart of the programme. It develops and markets positive perceptions of the
benefits of sanitation to particular target audiences in order generate demand.
Typically, these benefits concern privacy, comfort and status rather than
improved health.
5.2 Strategic sanitation
The failure of large supply driven investment programmes led to the

development of the strategic sanitation approach (SSA), developed during the
1990s to improve the sustainable delivery of sanitation in urban areas. SSA
uses the principles of social marketing and combines these with a demand
responsive approach and various incentive driven institutional arrangements.
Whatever its intended application, many of its underlying demand based
principles can be applied to rural and peri-urban areas. SSA is therefore highly
relevant to this research (White, 1997).
In terms of the consumer, SSA involves the following:

• a wider choice of technological options, including low cost appropriate
technologies;
• the recognition and analysis of consumer’s WTP;
• methods of matching services to affordability;
• innovative financing; and
C-20
June 2000
• capacity building initiatives that enable all stakeholders including users and
local government to implement responsive, sustainable programmes.
The key point is that consumer demand has to be created and then informed
with a range of service, management and financial options. The support
provided should also include facilitating the creation of community
organisations that afford individual households the opportunity to discuss and
agree aspects of project management (White, 1997).
There is wide agreement that the process of informing users is best done
laterally, using local trained facilitators. Essentially, information exchange is a
two way process. A dialogue is needed to ensure the implementing
organisation understands the viewpoint and constraints of the potential users.
Above all, it is important that the implementing organisation has an
understanding of the users’ perspective of the benefits of improved sanitation.
Possibly the best example of this type of approach comes from Mindapore in
West Bengal.
Box 5: Midnapore sanitation project: West Bengal
The Midnapore project in West Bengal features the presentation of a range of affordable and
acceptable technical options with price tags, and developed local capacity (village youth groups
organised in clusters) to meet the resulting demand. A revolving fund was used to establish
local production centres (of sanitation infrastructure) on a firm financial footing and to provide
interest free loans to those who could not afford full payment. Loan repayment was prompt.
There were no subsidies. Hygiene and sanitation awareness was built through village centres,
and included wall writing, village motivation camps, home visits and exhibitions.
Sengupta (1998)
It is too early to state that this approach will be sustainable in the longer term,
although all the indications are that the project will be successful. In this case
there is no information describing how the technical choices were identified in
the first place and how WTP was established.
5.3 Perceived weaknesses of SSA
If there is a question with this approach, it concerns the use of demand

assessment techniques to establish WTP for largely unfamiliar sanitation
options at project level. A study in Ouagadougou, Burkina examined this issue.
As the population was unfamiliar with sanitation technologies, the attributes of
various sanitation options were presented in a CVM survey to determine WTP.
To keep the survey manageable, most respondents were offered a choice of two
technical options. Information was also obtained about financing arrangements.
C-21
June 2000
The study concluded that it is possible to use CVM to establish WTP even
where people are unfamiliar with the technical options being presented. The
results could be used to help design a sanitation programme for the town,
although other factors would have to be taken into account, including public
health considerations (Altaf, 1994).
One major concern with such studies concerns the degree to which households
are informed before or during the survey process. In Ouagadougou it was
mentioned to respondents that pour flush toilets needed one or two litres of
water for operation. 64% of respondents preferred this system over VIPs, for
reasons of hygiene, its ‘modernity’, and ease of maintenance. The survey also
established that 75% of sample households were dissatisfied with their water
supply. The majority of households offered pour flush toilets were dependent
on public standpipes. The data is not gender disaggregated.
An additional weaknesses of SSA’s demand based approach was highlighted

by Taylor in his introduction to the electronic conference on the subject
(Taylor, 1999). He states that SSA pays insufficient attention to the need to
balance local demand and the wider, longer term environmental and third party
or social implications, which may well impact on longer term sustainability or
the livelihoods of others. This criticism has also been applied to demand
responsive approaches to water supply.
Very little work seems to have been carried out to establish the demand for
sanitation by women, and how to ensure that this is taken into account in a
process which is relatively focused on establishing WTP. Once again, this
applies to water supply as well as sanitation. An UNDP project in South Asia3
is currently investigating this issue and it makes sense to establish linkages
with it.
5.3 Informing demand with sanitation options
Many of the apparent difficulties faced by engineers in the context of demand

responsive sanitation projects concern the identification and presentation of
different technical options to inform demand.
In presenting different options to potential users, the ‘sanitation ladder’ is often

used to explain their relative characteristics and promote discussion. However,
the facilitator’s notion of hierarchy may not actually apply in practice,
depending on user perceptions and local circumstances. Participatory tools
and approaches have to be developed with the potential users before they can
be applied (Ngubane et al, 1999). If this is done, tools such as those based on
the sanitation ladder can be very effective (Box 6).
3
Participation, Gender and Demand Responsiveness: Making the links with impact and
sustainability of WSS investments.
C-22
June 2000
Box 6: The sanitation ladder: Tabora, Tanzania
In Tabora, a sanitation ladder was developed based on a series of pictures ranging from infield
defecation through traditional latrines to a VIP. The pictures were locally developed and drawn
by a local artist. Because project staff had had negative experiences with the sanplat, this had
not been included in the ladder. Such an approach promotes the idea of incremental
development, and linked to the training of local artisans and a locally managed subsidy, forms
the basis for a successful sanitation project.
It was however recommended by an external review team that the sanitation ladder be
extended to include sanplats and pour flush toilets, as well as a toilet with an external hand
washing basin.
Sakafu (1999)
A related point is that many engineers are not sufficiently familiar with an
adequate range of technical options to give consumers adequate choice. As a
result, they may be misinformed and their demand not adequately captured to
ensure sustainability (Mara, 1999). The national or regional authority may also
rule out the use of some ‘alternative’ designs because they do not coincide with
their existing rigid standards (Parkinson, 1999).
To inform potential users of the advantages and disadvantages of various

sanitation options, the CVM study in Burkina previously mentioned used
photographs and descriptions of characteristics of each option. Other projects
have used demonstration facilities. Three associated points are:
• different options should reflect user rather than the implementing agency’s
perceptions of sanitation: for example, it may turn out to be more relevant to
demonstrate a variety superstructures than a variety of technologies (Deverill,
1999)
• many characteristics of a sanitation option are only manifested once it is in use

(odour, ease of keeping clean, water requirement); and
• any demonstration toilets must be of the standard that can be provided by the
programme in order not to raise false expectations.
A case study from a supply driven project in Bharatpur, India clearly
demonstrates the importance of consulting with potential users in order to
establish their preference for sanitation (Box 7).
C-23
June 2000
Box 7: Identification of consumer preferences, Bharatpur, India
The double pit latrine system had been identified by the implementing organisation as the most
appropriate technology and many had been built.
Later it was discovered that a significant proportion of these had been converted by users into
crude septic tank systems (without an adequate drainage). Prior to the sanitation project, septic
tanks were common place and people were evidently used to their perceived benefits It is clear
that the existing practices of potential users will be a major factor in determining their preference
for any improvement, and this should be taken into account by the engineer.
(Colin, 1999 & Taylor, 1999).
A weakness with the demand based approaches considered is that they are
largely divorced from behavioural change related to hygiene, without which
health benefits will not follow (Blackett, 1999). It could be argued that this
could equality apply to supply led sanitation projects. However, in advocating
a new response it makes sense to take a holistic viewpoint. A hygiene
component has to be built in to the process if health improvements are to result.
There are several useful examples showing how this can be achieved in
practice. PHAST techniques which focus on collective understanding have
proved very successful in this context: the sanitation ladder often forms part of
a PHAST tool kit. The establishment of health clubs in Bikita, Zimbabwe
provides an alternative solution (Mathew, 1999). The key point is that demand
based, projects provide clear opportunities to integrate hygiene with hardware
delivery.
5.4 Summary
In summarising this section, a number of points can be made. Many of these

apply equally to water supply and sanitation:
 best practice for sanitation combines aspects of social marketing with

aspects of demand responsiveness;
 establishing WTP is potentially useful as a means of matching demand with
appropriate services: however, it is essential that this demand is fully
informed of the characteristics, costs and benefits of each option.
 most demand assessment studies related to sanitation has not differentiated
between the different needs and demands of men and women;
 the approach adopted must take into account both environmental and third
party constraints;
C-24
June 2000
 technical, financial and managerial choices must be presented that take into
account the perceptions of users;
 there is a danger that by focusing on demand, the vital link with hygiene
will not be considered; however, there are examples of how this can be
achieved such as the use of PHAST.
C-25
June 2000
6. Poverty
6.1 Designing for the poor
On of the major criticisms of demand based water supply and sanitation

projects is that they can easily exclude and further marginalize the poor, not
just in terms of poor communities, but also in terms of the poor within
communities. In practice, the 4th Dublin principle which refers to water as an
economic good is often only half quoted, missing out the phrase:
…… “within this principle, it is vital to recognize first the basic right of all
human beings to have access to clean water and sanitation at an affordable
price…”
The following example of a supply driven project which ignored the poor
comes from South Africa. Emphasis was placed on adherence to guidelines and
spending funds quickly rather than on investigating what was affordable and
practical.
Box 8: Designing for whom?
A recent evaluation of an isolated impoverished area of South Africa found that a water supply
scheme had been implemented that was clearly unaffordable to local community members.
Letters in the project file stated that the scheme could never be sustained, and that an
alternative should be considered. However, the project went ahead because otherwise the
consultants involved would have lost the funding.
The company involved failed to establish what was affordable and identify and use creative
solutions to drive down costs. Instead, a system was implemented that the engineers
themselves conceded was completely unworkable. The scheme purifies all water, regardless of
its proposed use, and at a cost which is beyond the economic capacity of the area.
The evaluations carried out consistently showed that systems were over designed and
unaffordable at local level. Technical considerations predominated and few role players had
tried to find creative ways to reduce costs.
(Breslin, 1999 )
Clearly, the approach illustrates the need to respond to people’s demand rather
than design according to rigid and inappropriate standards.
The need to identify and include the poor is implicit in any equitable project. In
practise, this issue is often overlooked. A review of water and sanitation
projects in four African countries (Deverill, 2000) concluded:
C-26
June 2000
• selection on projects based on an expressed demand will exclude the poor if

they cannot communicate their needs or a sufficiently large up-front
contribution; and
• very few projects identify the poor and their particular needs within a
community.
• A 1997 study of rural infrastructure projects implemented in Africa found no

mention of steps being taken to identify the poor within communities - very few
evaluation reports raised the subject at all (Derbyshire et al, 1997).
“No records exist in the programme office on how villages are managing to
balance the needs of relatively wealthy cattle owners against the domestic
needs of the less well off, and how the tariff structures water committees are
setting may be restricting some peoples access to water” (Sakafu, 1997).
During an evaluation of a WaterAid supported programme in Tabora,

Tanzania, it was confirmed that in some areas, the poor were not always able to
use the improved water supply, simply because they could not always afford
the water. Their income was seasonal, based on selling mangoes, and at times
was insufficient to pay for water. In another community, poorer families tended
to have smaller water containers than the better off, and had to make many
journeys to the water source (Sakafu, 1997).
Although the Mvula Trust funds relatively small projects in rural areas in South
Africa, no mention is made in current Mvula guidelines of the need to identify
and make provision for poorer members of the community.
The recognition that communities are not homogeneous groups but exhibit
social differentiation is paramount. In the context of supply driven approaches
that treat water as a social good, to be made freely available to all, this is not
necessarily an issue. In demand driven projects there is a danger that
contributions can easily fall disproportionately on those least able to bear them
(Narayan, 1995).
6.2 Implications for practice
In overall terms, projects must ensure that benefits are distributed equally to
poorer and otherwise disadvantaged groups within communities, and that they
do not bear a disproportionate proportion of the costs involved.
The following approaches have been identified for use in this context:
 stakeholder analysis which:

 identifies and defines the characteristics of key stakeholders;
C-27
June 2000
 assesses the manner in which they might be affected by the project;

 highlights relations between stakeholders; and
 assesses the capacity of different stakeholder groups to participate;
 participatory wealth ranking exercises to identify stakeholder groups and
establish baseline data for monitoring and evaluating costs and benefits, for
establishing discussion groups and to provide information for a poverty
targeting strategy;
 widely disseminating information about the project to encourage
accountability and transparency;
 conducting small group discussions, and use these to reach a community
consensus and representative decision making and management structures;
and
 working with the majority to encourage them to include the minority rather
than targeting the poorest directly.
Fundamentally, projects should be in a position to monitor the benefits and
costs of services to the poorest. The extent to which projects will focus on the
needs of the poorest will vary. Targeting poverty is not a demand led agenda
and is likely to require long term support (Derbyshire et al 1997).
6.3 Poverty, demand assessment and the engineer’s

role
Once the poor groups have been identified as primary stakeholders in their own
right, either options and associated systems can be designed which they are and
willing and able to afford, or they can be subsidised at local, regional or
national level. In South Africa, there are examples of communities taking the
decision to cross subsidize the poor by effectively over charging the users of
private connections to subsidize users of public stand pipes The issue of cross
subsidization requires considerable discussion at the start of the project, and
will only be effective if the scheme is affordable in overall terms. (Breslin,
1999).
Demand assessment is a major component of a demand responsive approach.

As such, it can actually help with poverty reduction by ensuring that the poor
get levels of service they want at a price they can afford. There is a growing
body of evidence that confirms that the poor are willing to pay for a reliable
service that meets their needs. Information from demand assessment exercises
can also be used to design sustainable cost recovery policies and appropriate
financing schemes that can help the poor (WELL 1998). The critical point is
that demand assessment must be appropriate to the situation, and this requires
detailed knowledge of all groups within a community including the poor.
C-28
June 2000
In terms of developing affordable technologies, one recurrent theme seems to

be how little engineers actually know. It would seem that many engineers lack
knowledge and confidence to propose low cost technology to users (Mara,
1999). For example, the use of cement stabilised soil bricks to build toilet
superstructures is a possible ‘affordable’ option in some parts of South Africa.
However, it is rarely if ever presented by engineers as an option (Still, 1997).
In the absence of case studies, a useful document is the following checklist
developed by IRC to assist projects assess demand responsive projects for a
‘poverty balance’ (IRC, 1999).
Table 3: Checklist for equity: demand responsive programming and equity
1. Eligibility criteria
Initial communication
Do all communities have equal knowledge of programme?
Is it understood equally well by different groups (men, women, rich, poor, caste)?
Do methods of implication favour one group over other?
Area and village Selection
Are selection criteria based on need or demand?
Does negative political influence or risk fair and transparent area village selection?
Management groups
Who in the community is involved?
Location and coverage
Who selects and how are the locations of sanitation and WP selected? Does this favour some
groups unfairly?
Does the current or proposed location provide fair access to women and the poor?
2. Technology choice
Selection
Did some groups (women etc) want less expensive options in terms of cash, O&M, labour
Why? What was done about this?
Is the technology selection biased towards richer or more powerful groups?
Timing
When is the service available? Is this timing equally convenient to all groups?
Who makes the rules about timing, who is consulted?
Service level
Is service provided to those in greatest need when they want it? What is the desired level of
use for domestic purposes?
Does the latrine technology provide a hygiene advantage over current practice?
3. Cost sharing for implementation and construction
Subsidy
Did the users of more expensive technologies receive a higher subsidy than groups having
less expensive technologies?
Is the implementation delayed a long time after the prospective users have completed their
payments in cash and kind?
Ownership
C-29
June 2000
Is the infrastructure perceived to be owned by one or very few persons. Why? Who uses the
facilities?
4. Community payment for sustained operation
Has a major effort been taken to raise awareness of various sources of funds and mechanisms
to reach remote and isolated areas?
Are there graduated or flat water tariffs? Do charges limit the amount of water taken up by
some families?
Has the project taken a decision re replacement of equipment? Are books available and up to
date?
What happens to the money that is paid by consumers? Where is it kept? How is it used in
reality?
6.4 Summary
 there is evidence that demand based water supply and sanitation projects can
easily marginalize the poor within communities if their needs are not
specifically identified;
 however, very few projects actually identify the poor within communities
and take their specific needs into account;
 in establishing the willingness and ability to pay of the poor, seasonal or
irregular income flows must be taken into account;
 approaches that seek to include the poor in the project process have been
identified - these include stakeholder analysis, the widespread dissemination
of project information, small group discussions, and working with the
majority to include the minority. The underlying principle is that projects
must be in a position to monitor and evaluate their impact on the poor in
terms of benefits and costs;
 it seems that many engineers lack the knowledge and skills to present
technical and financial options to communities that are affordable for the
poor; and
 a useful ‘poverty’ based checklist has been developed by the IRC for
demand responsive projects.
C-30
June 2000
7. Conclusions
As it stands, the literature review enables a number of conclusions to be drawn.

For the engineer, designing for demand is based on two related processes:
informing the potential user about the characteristics, benefits and life cycle
costs of a number of technical options in order to establish demand, and then
reacting to the demand expressed to come up with a final design. This is done
in an iterative manner, involving good communications, social intermediation,
trust and transparency.
The main difference between sanitation and water supply concerns the degree
to which demand has to be created and informed. In order to fulfil this role,
engineers are going to have to consider households as customers and
communities as clients. It is also evident that engineers will have to work very
closely with both social intermediaries and other sector professionals. The
extent that an engineer would get involved in identifying and presenting
financial options to households needs further consideration.
If communities are to be given a choice, it is important that any project rules

concerning the payment of a proportion of capital costs do not favour the
community adopting a particular technology over another. Ideally, any up-front
payment should reflect the lifecycle costs that the community will be expected
to be responsible for.
Engineers must try to identify a sufficiently wide spread of technical options to

capture WTP. There is evidence that many engineers are constrained by
technical bias and a lack of knowledge of low cost options in particular. How
life cycle costs are established and then presented is also a grey area where
there is insufficient guidance.
Options may not just be technical, but also relate to how services are delivered
and financial systems that capture WTP, for example, by facilitating users to
get house connections they want. Links to an associated KaR ‘Cost recovery in
Water and Sanitation Projects’ should be developed.
Engineers must also design for the future in terms of population growth and
upgrading. Both effects can be significant. There may be scope within demand
assessment exercises to establish the extent of upgrading. However,
consideration must be given to the safe yield of a water source, and if
necessary demand management techniques used to ensure an equitable supply
can be sustained. In general, more information is needed concerning the design
of flexible systems that can accommodate change in the future.
More work is needed to establish how the different demands of women can be
addressed. This is particularly important if the demand assessment techniques
C-31
June 2000
used focus on WTP, as women in general have little influence over household
expenditure. This applies as much to sanitation as it does to water supply.
Links should be made with a UNDP/IRC project currently investigating links
between gender and demand responsiveness.
Steps should be taken to ensure that the approaches adopted do not further
marginalize the poor. To retain a poverty focus, projects must identify poor
groups within communities and include them in the process. For engineers, low
cost technologies and solutions must be identified and presented to poor
households. Alternatively, financial options that facilitate local cross
subsidisation should be considered. A checklist that specifically examines the
impact of a demand responsive project on the poor has been illustrated in the
review. The underlying principle is that projects must be in a position to
monitor and evaluate their impact on the poor in terms of benefits and costs.
References:
Altaf, M.A. and Hughes,J.A. (1994) Measuring the demand for improved
urban sanitation services: results of a contingent valuation study in
Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Urban Studies, vol 31 no 10
Blackett, I. (1999) Where is the health aspect to SSA? Contribution to

electronic debate on SSA, 28 October 1999 http:
//www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/gesi/
Breslin, N. (1999) Lessons From the Field: Rethinking community

management for sustainability Rural and peri-urban water supply and
sanitation in South Africa – appropriate practice conference East London
March 1999
Colin, J. (1999) Experiences from Bharatpur, Rajastan Contribution to

electronic debate on SSA, 2 November 1999 http://
www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/gesi/
Derbyshire, H. and Vickers, P. (1997) The Sustainable Provision of Poverty

Focused Rural Infrastructure in Africa: a Study of best practice DFID August
1997
Deverill, P., Ntuli, J. and Still, D. (1999) Simple solutions for difficult
problems: sanitation in Maputaland, Lessons learned conference:
Implementing sanitation in KwaZulu Natal, Hillcrest, South Africa, March
1999
Deverill, P. A. (2000) Lessons learnt from water sanitation and environmental

scoping studies: Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania and Nigeria WELL, March 2000
C-32
June 2000
DFID (1998) Mid-term output to purpose review: Oju and Obi LGA water and
sanitation project DFID West and North Africa Department, October 1998
Garn, M. (1998) Managing water as an economic good: the transition from

supply oriented to demand responsive services Background paper to World
Bank conference on community water supply, Washington 1998
IRC, (1997) Linking technology choice with operation and maintenance for
low cost water supply and sanitation. Operation and maintenance working
group of Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council, IRC The Hague
1997
IRC (1999) Discussion paper: Demand responsive programming and equity: a

discussion paper for the water and sanitation sector
http://www.irc.nl/home/comm/demand.htm 1999.
Mara, D. (1999) Peri-urban sanitation Contribution to electronic debate on

SSA, 13 October 1999
http: //www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/gesi/
Mathews, B. (1999) Health clubs - hygiene education in Bikita IRWSSP, 25th

WEDC Conference
Addis Ababa August 1999
Mbewe, I. and Sutton, S. The underestimated potential of traditional water

sources? 25th WEDC Conference Addis Ababa August 1999
Narayan, D. (1995) Designing community based development The World Bank

Environment Department Paper No 007 Washington DC
Ngubane, N. (1999) Why PHAST failed to create demand at Ebuyeni, Lessons

learned conference: Implementing sanitation in KwaZulu Natal, Hillcrest,
South Africa, March 1999
Parkinson, J. (1999) Involving community based initiatives in strategic

planning Contribution to electronic debate on SSA 5 November 1999 http:
Parry-Jones, S. (1999) Optimising the selection of demand assessment

techniques for water supply and sanitation projects WELL Task No 207
October 1999
Rall, M. (1999) The Demand Responsive Approach to community water supply

and sanitation as interpreted and applied by the Mvula Trust Paper submitted
to Electronic Conference on DRA July 1999 http:
//www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/dra/
C-33
June 2000
Sakafu, A., Forrester, K., and Laing, M. (1999) Participatory evaluation of

WaterAid’s support for water, sanitation and hygiene in Tabora Region,
Tanzania, WaterAid, January 1999
Sara, J. (1998) Giving communities choice is not enough! Background paper to

World bank conference on community water supply Washington 1998
Sara, J. and Katz, T. (1998) Making rural water supply sustainable: report on
the impact of project rules UNDP WSP 1998
Sengupta (1999) Creating Sanitation Awareness: Integrated Sanitation

Project, Midnapore, India World Bank conference on Community water
supply and sanitation, May 1998
Shordt, K. (1999) Demand responsive programming and equity: a discussion

paper for the water and sanitation sector IRC April 1999
Silkin, T. (1998) A simple but large scale system in Ethiopia Case study
presented at World Bank conference on community water supply, Washington
1998
Smout, I.K., Skinner, B.H., Mukerji,R., Rajiv, K.R., Nath, S. and Sen, S. Joint
evaluation of UNICEF assisted projects in the water and sanitation sector,
India WELL Task No 1, July 1997
Still, D. and Holden, R. (1997) Towards sustainable sanitation in South Africa

Paper presented at 23rd WEDC conference Durban
Taylor, K. (1999) Strategic Approaches to Urban Sanitation Provision

Background paper for Electronic conference on SSA October 1999 http:
Trace, S. (1999) A summary from WaterAid’s perspective Contribution to

electronic debate on DRA, 2 July 1999 http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/dra/
UNDP (1997) Report on workshop on willingness to pay for drinking water

and sanitation UNDP Rural Water and Sanitation Group - South Asia and
DFID September 1997
Webster, M. (1999) Effective Demand for Rural Water Supply in South Africa
WEDC 1999
Wedgwood, A. (2000) Case studies on the engineer’s role in designing for

demand. Unpublished.
C-34
June 2000
WELL (1998) DFID Guidance manual on water supply and sanitation

programmes, WELL 1998
White, A.M. (1997) Towards a strategic sanitation approach: improving the

sustainability of urban sanitation in developing countries UNDP-World Bank
Washington DC 1997
White, J. Evaluation synthesis of rural water and sanitation projects, DFID

Evaluation report EV 596 May 19997
World Bank (1993) The demand for water in rural areas: determinants and
policy implications World Bank Water Demand Research Team Observer, vol
8 no 1 January 1993
World Bank (1998) Report of the community water supply and sanitation
conference May 5-8 1998, Washington UNPD Water and Sanitation
Programme, Washington DC September 1998
C-35

Designing Water Supply and Sanitation Projects

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Designing Water Supply and Sanitation Projects

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Designing water supply and

Ian Smout and Paul Deverill

Water, Engineering and Development Centre

3. Review of project methodology...............................5

4. Key issues arising from literature review.................8

5. Proposed dissemination strategies........................14

2. Why design for demand?.......................................5

3. Demand assessment and WTP...............................9

3.3 Responding to informed demand ....................................................12

4. Demand responsive water supply in practice........14

5. Demand responsive sanitation.............................20

Annex A: Updated project proposal A-1

Annex B: Research framework B-1

Annex C: Literature review C-1

Annex D: Draft terms of reference D-1

Annex E: Project Flyer E-1

1.1 Description of project outputs

The project outputs consist of the following:

 An in-depth research report reviewing current international practices and

1.2 Structure of Inception Report

The following major activities were identified in the Scope of Work, an

2.1 Literature review

2.2 Field research with project collaborators

In Tanzania, a particular focus of the collaboration concerns the identification

2.3 Review group

A project review group is to be established in order to review the outputs

2.4 Research reports

3. Review of project methodology

3.1 Work to date

 A research framework has been developed (Annex B). This document

 Thought is being given to the dissemination strategy, which is recognised as

3.2 Key changes to project methodology

3.2.1 Links with other projects

The most significant change to the methodology proposed is a plan to make

DFID KaR 'Cost Recovery in Water and Sanitation Projects' managed by

DFID KaR 'Guidelines for sustainable handpump projects in Africa' managed

UNDP/IRC Research 'Participation, Gender and Demand Responsiveness:

3.2.2 Change of personnel

Sarah Parry-Jones, originally the principal WEDC research associate with

The team is otherwise unchanged:

 Ian Smout (project manager)

An updated workplan has included as part of the revised Scope of Work

Country Visit dates WEDC person involved

South Africa 8 – 31 May 2000 Paul Deverill

Tanzania 15 Jul - 3 Aug 2000 Paul Deverill

Nepal 14 Aug - 4 Sep Paul Deverill

India 18 Sep - 6 Oct Paul Deverill

4. Key issues arising from literature review

4.2 Designing for demand: general implications

Sanitation is fundamentally different to water supply because in most cases the

a) inform demand and work with other disciplines as necessary to create

The process is iterative, involving dialogue between households and technical

 If household demand is critical, to what extent can this be aggregated

 It is clear that demand responsive approaches require not only technical

 In the same context, how should responsibilities be defined? Who, for

 The process of informing and responding to demand is more complex than a

There are also a number of implications for engineers in particular:

 In order to capture household demand, a range of technical and delivery

 Engineers will have to work with social intermediaries to present the

4.3 Water supply

The literature review identified a number of key issues concerning the

in-house water treatment and improved methods of transporting water. In order