Subscriber access provided by UB + Fachbibliothek Chemie | (FU-Bibliothekssystem)
Policy Analysis
How much will it cost to monitor microbial drinking water quality in sub-Saharan Africa? Caroline Delaire, Rachel Peletz, Emily Kumpel, Joyce Kisiangani, Robert Bain, and Ranjiv Khush Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript • Publication Date (Web): 01 May 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on May 2, 2017
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
Environmental Science & Technology is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 32
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Environmental Science & Technology
How much will it cost to monitor microbial drinking water quality in sub-Saharan Africa? Caroline Delaire*,†, Rachel Peletz†, Emily Kumpel†, Joyce Kisiangani†, Robert Bain∫, Ranjiv Khush‡
8 9
†
The Aquaya Institute, PO Box 21862, Nairobi, Kenya; Phone: +254 701-178-714; Fax:
10
+1 415-306-7594
11
∫
12
USA
13
‡
Division of Data, Research and Policy, UNICEF, 3 UN Plaza, New York, NY 10017,
The Aquaya Institute, 12 E Sir Francis Drake Blvd, Suite E, Larkspur, CA 94939 USA
14 15
*
16
+254 739-384-197; Fax: +1 415-306-7594;
[email protected] Corresponding Author: The Aquaya Institute, PO Box 21862, Nairobi, Kenya; Phone:
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
1
Environmental Science & Technology
26
Page 2 of 32
Abstract
27 28
Microbial water quality monitoring is crucial for managing water resources and
29
protecting public health. However, institutional testing activities in sub-Saharan Africa
30
are currently limited. Because the economics of water quality testing are poorly
31
understood, the extent to which cost may be a barrier to monitoring in different settings is
32
unclear. This study used cost data from eighteen African monitoring institutions (piped
33
water suppliers and health surveillance agencies in six countries) and estimates of water
34
supply type coverage from fifteen countries to assess the annual financial requirements
35
for microbial water testing at both national and regional levels, using World Health
36
Organization recommendations for sampling frequency. We found that a microbial water
37
quality test costs 21.0 ± 11.3 USD, on average, including consumables, equipment, labor,
38
and logistics, which is higher than previously calculated. Our annual cost estimates for
39
microbial monitoring of piped supplies and improved point sources ranged between 8,000
40
USD for Equatorial Guinea and 1.9 million USD for Ethiopia, depending primarily on the
41
population served but also on the distribution of piped water system sizes. A comparison
42
with current national water and sanitation budgets showed that the cost of implementing
43
prescribed testing levels represents a relatively modest proportion of existing budgets
44
(
