Selecting Sanitation Solutions for Peri-urban Areas: A Case Study of Can Tho, Vietnam Naomi Carrard, Juliet Willetts, Cynthia Mitchell, Mick Paddon and Monique Retamal Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney (E-mail:
[email protected])
Abstract: In peri-urban areas where infrastructure investments have not yet been made, there is a need to determine the most context-appropriate, fit for purpose and sustainable sanitation solutions. Decision makers must identify the optimal system scale (on the spectrum from centralized to community to cluster scale) and assess the long-term costs and socio-economic/environmental impacts associated with different options. Addressing both cost-effectiveness and sustainability are essential to ensure that institutions and communities are able to continue to bear the costs and management burden of infrastructure operation, maintenance and asset replacement. This paper describes an approach to sanitation planning currently being undertaken as a research study in Can Tho City in southern Vietnam, by the Institute for Sustainable Futures and Can Tho University in collaboration with Can Tho Water Supply and Sewerage Company. The aim of the study is to facilitate selection of the most context-appropriate, fit for purpose, cost effective and sustainable sanitation infrastructure solution. As such, the study compares a range of sanitation alternatives including centralized, decentralized (at household or cluster scale) and resource recovery options. This paper provides an overview of the study and considers aspects of the Can Tho and Vietnamese regulatory, development and institutional context that present drivers and challenges for comparison of options and selection of fit for purpose sanitation systems. Keywords: Peri-urban, Sanitation options, Cost-effectiveness, Vietnam
INTRODUCTION In the context of rapid urbanization across Asia there is a critical need for more robust decisionmaking between different ways of providing sanitation services in existing and new peri-urban areas. Sanitation infrastructure is either non-existent or operating poorly and finance for investment, operation and maintenance is often unavailable (Toubkiss, 2006). Within this context, the scale and type of infrastructure that is most ‘appropriate’ remains an unanswered question, in terms of cost (both capital and operating costs, for both utilities and customers) and in terms of environmental and social sustainability, particularly in the face of climate change. Technological advances in recent years now offer a broader range of effective sanitation solutions of different types, scales and configurations. In the water industry internationally there has been increasing shift towards use of innovative alternatives to complement traditional large scale centralized wastewater systems. Decentralized systems at household or cluster scale are increasingly recognised as providing potential benefits in matching capital investment with demand, optimising the energy use of water systems, and facilitating recycling of valuable resources including nutrients and water (Pinkham et al., 2004). Source separation of different wastewater streams is also being recognised as offering a critical and potentially cost-effective contribution to sustainability and local response to looming phosphorus shortages (Cordell et al, 2009), with an increasing array of technologies available to facilitate lower cost and more efficient reuse of water and nutrients at different scales (SuSanA, 2009). The opportunities presented by the increasing menu of technological options also create challenges in terms of determining which option is best for a given context and purpose. In addition, whereas historical drivers for providing sanitation infrastructure focused on improving public health and urban amenity (Abeysuriya et al., 2010), planners today must strive to also meet many equally important objectives including protecting the natural environment, minimising energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, ensuring infrastructure is resilient to the impacts of climate change, maximising resource efficiency and re-use potential of nutrients and water, ensuring services are affordable for all and designing management, finance and tariff systems that facilitate sustainable operation over the long term. There is therefore a need to develop planning processes that assist decision makers in comparing multiple sanitation options with reference to multiple objectives, to determine which options offer the most appropriate or ‘fit for purpose’ solution. Which solution is “fit for purpose” will vary greatly between different locations. Good planning processes must therefore be firmly situated in the local physical, institutional and political context. Water Practice & Technology Vol 5 No 4 © IWA Publishing 2010 doi: 10.2166/WPT.2010.109
This paper presents one such planning approach currently being piloted in a peri-urban area of Can Tho City in Vietnam. A team from the Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) at the University of Technology, Sydney and Can Tho University (CTU) in collaboration with Can Tho Water Supply and Sewerage Company are undertaking research to assess the cost-effectiveness and sustainability of a range of sanitation infrastructure options. With support from AusAID’s Australian Development Research Awards, the research is being undertaken focusing on a rapidly developing urban area in the south of Can Tho and runs from June 2009 to late 2010. Can Tho has been chosen as the case study site as its high rate of growth and challenges associated with infrastructure provision in peri-urban areas typify the experience of urban centres across Southeast Asia. Lessons learnt from the Can Tho case study are likely to be relevant for utilities and policy makers in cities across Vietnam and the wider region. The paper describes characteristics of fit for purpose and sustainable sanitation systems and presents the planning approach currently being implemented in Can Tho City. The Can Tho case study is described including background and context, the suite of sanitation options being assessed, considerations for selecting technologies, the approach to defining spatial boundaries between areas with different treatment systems and next steps. Drawing on experiences of the study team to date, the paper then critically assesses aspects of the Vietnamese and Can Tho institutional and regulatory context that respectively facilitate and present challenges for this kind of planning process, and implications for selecting fit for purpose and sustainable sanitation systems in Vietnam and developing countries more broadly. SELECTING ‘FIT FOR PURPOSE’ SUSTAINABLE SANITATION SYSTEMS To be considered ‘fit for purpose’, according to the International Water Association (IWA 2006), a sanitation system should meet service provision objectives (for both service provider and end users), have management requirements that match available skills and finances, and function as intended treating wastewater to the required quality. Choosing fit for purpose systems therefore requires moving beyond traditional sanitation planning, with its focus on normative technical design (IWA, 2006). The Sustainable Sanitation Alliance extends these requirements, defining a sustainable sanitation system as one that is economically viable, socially acceptable, technically and institutionally appropriate, and protects the environment and natural resources (SuSanA, 2008). To meet these objectives in an urban context, SuSanA proposes that planning systems should consider all waste streams including stormwater, be reuse oriented so that waste is used beneficially wherever possible, and examine a comprehensive suite of technology options to determine the most sustainable rather than typical solution (SuSanA, 2008a) . The planning process must therefore seek solutions that are most appropriate for a particular context and purpose, bearing in mind multiple social, economic and environmental objectives. In some situations, it is likely that centralized systems treating combined black and grey water may provide the best solution while in others different configurations and scales of decentralized systems may be more appropriate. In some cases discharge to local waterways may be the most viable option for disposal of treated wastewater while in others, systems that permit re-use of water, nutrients or both may offer more sustainable solutions. A methodology developed by a team from the Institute for Sustainable Futures seeks to identify the best fit for purpose systems for a particular context by comparing a range of sanitation alternatives at different scales and configurations in terms of both cost effectiveness and sustainability. The cost-effectiveness will be assessed drawing on an approach developed by the Institute for Sustainable Futures with five Australian water utilities (see Mitchell et al., 2007) and the sustainability assessment will involve key stakeholders deliberating on a set of locally determined institutional, socio-economic, environmental and climate change adaptation criteria. The methodology considers the spread of costs between different stakeholders, allows determination of the option with the lowest overall cost to society and considers how costs might be appropriately shared between stakeholders. 2
Adapting and piloting the approach in the Vietnamese context, the planning process includes steps as described in Figure 1. STEP 1 Define objectives, understand the context and define the scope of the study
Participatory process with relevant stakeholders to reach agreed objectives and define the scope of the study including economic parameters for analysis. Situation analysis to identify key physical, institutional, social and environmental factors.
STEP 2 Collect data to determine water balance and identify sanitation infrastructure options for assessment
End use study to understand water use in homes and determine the quantity and quality of wastewater streams. Participatory process to design sanitation options and select technologies for analysis.
STEP 3 Analyse sanitation infrastructure options to identify costs and benefits for each option
Development of water balance and options analysis model. Detailed design of options including specifying costs for input to the model. Modelling including analysis of capital and operational costs and water and nutrient resource implications of each option.
STEP 4 Compare the costs of each option and determine who bears different costs
Determine the unit cost for each option and compare options to a reference case. Identify the distribution of all costs to understand which costs are borne by each stakeholder group.
STEP 5 Identify important social and environmental criteria and conduct sustainability assessment
Participatory process with relevant stakeholders, addressing key locally defined social, environmental and climate change adaptation criteria in addition to the cost comparisons.
STEP 6 Document the analysis and identify lessons for utilities and policy makers across the region
Transparent documentation of the methodology and results to inform wider policy and planning, including development of guidance material for utilities in Southeast Asia to inform future sanitation planning.
Figure 1: Planning methodology for assessing cost effectiveness and sustainability of sanitation options
CAN THO CASE STUDY Background and context Can Tho is the largest city in the Mekong Delta in southern Vietnam, with a population of almost 1.2 million. Since gaining national Class 1 status (city with provincial status) in 2004, Can Tho has experienced rapid urbanization and industrialization. Industry and construction now constitute more than 40% of the local economy, compared with 15% for agriculture (CTU and PCC, 2009). Under current socio-economic development plans Can Tho City has an overall projected economic growth rate of 17% per annum to 2020 and a population increase of nearly 60%. Although 65% of residents currently live in rural and suburban areas, spatial and construction masterplans for Can Tho City indicate increasing urban consolidation including development of dense residential precincts in peri-urban and semi-agricultural areas. The study area for the sanitation options assessment is ‘South Can Tho’, comprising four wards in Cai Rang District south of the Can Tho River as shown in Figure 2. The site was selected for analysis by Can Tho Water Supply and Sanitation Company (WSSC). The study area covers a total area of 4.8ha and although considered a ‘greenfield’ site, has an estimated current population of 40,000 people, many of whom live in informal settlement areas. The projected population of the site is more than 120,000 people. Driving development in the study area is the imminent completion of Can Tho Bridge, which will connect Can Tho to neighbouring Vinh Long Province and provide 3
direct road access between Can Tho and Ho Chi Minh City, replacing the current congested ferry system. To facilitate the development of new residential and commercial areas, South Can Tho has been divided into approximately 40 ‘development lots’ sized from 5 to 150 hectares with predicted populations ranging from 1,000 to 25,000.
Figure 2: Can Tho city and study site
Existing sanitation systems in Can Tho City rely on household septic tanks to pre-treat blackwater, as required by national building regulations (MoC, cited in Nguyen et al. 2006). Pre-treated blackwater is combined with untreated greywater and stormwater before being discharged to waterways. The quality of pre-treatment is likely to be poor, as septic tanks are built into the foundations of dwellings and rarely if ever maintained or de-sludged. A wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) is currently being constructed with financial and institutional support from German development agencies GTZ, KfW and DED. This treatment plant is located in South Can Tho, but under current plans will only treat wastewater from the existing urban centre in Ninh Kieu to the north of Can Tho River and was not designed to accommodate wastewater from the new South Can Tho urban area, though a capacity upgrade to allow this is a potential option under consideration. A government decree (Decree 88, 2007) requires wastewater and stormwater infrastructure to be kept separate in all newly developed areas, including South Can Tho. This means that wastewater flows from this area will be more concentrated than the flows from Ninh Kieu to be treated by the WWTP. Development in the study site is administered by the South Can Tho Urban Administrative Authority under the authority of the Department of Construction. The process of resettlement of people from informal areas, typically located along waterways, has been initiated and some of these areas are currently being cleared. A number of new residential precincts have been constructed by private developers and are now inhabited. Common infrastructure (including roads, telecommunication networks, water supply, sewage and drainage systems) is being installed in parallel to the construction of residential developments, though coordination between the two is generally poor. New residential developments are typically dense and dominated by row houses of 2, 3, 4 or more storeys. Some areas are earmarked to house resettled communities, while others are pitched at wealthier socio-economic groups. Oversight of planning and managing urban sanitation systems in Vietnam is spread across a number of agencies. At the national level, sanitation planning for urban areas is governed by the Ministry of Construction (MoC). At the provincial level the Department of Construction (DoC) takes responsibility for implementing relevant regulations about the built environment and infrastructure. However, some aspects of water quality and environmental regulation sit with the Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DoNRE) and socio-economic development planning and investment are led by the Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI). Decision making on all these aspects at the local level is the responsibility of the People’s Committee. 4
Over recent years a number of national level regulations and directives have been issued to promote and guide development of urban sanitation systems. Prime Ministerial Decree 758 on urban upgrading requires that 45% of sewerage is collected and treated by 2020. More specifically guiding development of sanitation systems are Decree 88 and Decision 1930 on drainage and sewerage for urban and industrial zones and QCVN 14 – the national technical regulation on domestic wastewater. Key features of these regulations include a requirement for separate household wastewater and stormwater systems, a move towards cost recovery for sanitation service delivery, application of the polluter pays principle, a requirement to consider alternative system scales when selecting technologies, and the institution of performance based standards for domestic wastewater quality (previously these only existed for industrial wastewater). The current situation in Vietnam represents a critical point in time for sanitation planning. Cities without infrastructure to collect, treat and dispose of wastewater are determining which systems to construct, guided by national regulations and mediated by local priorities and realities. As urbanization and growth continues apace, new sanitation solutions are required for both existing, densely settled urban areas and new development sites such as South Can Tho. It is in this context that the sanitation options assessment is being undertaken in Can Tho. The following section outlines progress in the study to date, including a description of the sanitation options to be considered and processes for determining spatial layout and technologies for each option. Sanitation options A set of five broad sanitation options have been selected for detailed analysis, as described in Table 1. These options were selected by project team members and stakeholders including representatives from ISF, Can Tho University, the Water Supply and Sewerage Company, the Department of Construction and the Department of Natural Resources and Environment. Options have been selected to reflect a mix between centralized and decentralized systems and a balance between what was considered to be ‘realistic’ and ‘pragmatic’ technology choices given the current situation in Can Tho, and ‘advanced’ or ‘futuristic’ options including those that utilize more advanced technologies or facilitate wastewater stream separation and reuse of water and/or nutrients. Table 1: Sanitation options included in the study Option Option 1 Centralized – connect to Cai Sau Wastewater Treatment Plant
Option 2 Decentralized – separate systems for each development area
Option 3 Combination of systems with single wastewater stream Option 4 Combination of systems with separation of greywater and blackwater for decentralized components Option 5 Combination of systems with separation of greywater, blackwater and urine for decentralized components
Description Connect all new developments to Cai Sau Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) which is currently under construction. This option involves roughly doubling the capacity of the plant from 30,000m3/day and constructing a primary and secondary sewer network in South Can Tho connecting developments in South Can Tho to the WWTP. Install decentralized wastewater treatment technologies at all development lots. Each installation would service multiple households within development precincts. Connect selected new developments (determined by spatial analysis of a relevant parameters) to Cai Sau WWTP. Provide decentralized wastewater treatment technologies for other developments. Connect selected new developments to Cai Sau WWTP. Provide decentralized wastewater treatment for other developments including separate pipe systems and separate treatment for blackwater and greywater. Connect selected new developments to Cai Sau WWTP. Provide decentralized wastewater treatment technologies for other developments, including urine separating toilets, separate pipe systems and treatment technologies for urine, greywater and blackwater. Collect and treat urine for agricultural reuse as fertilizer. This option builds on a pilot ecological sanitation project recently undertaken by Can Tho University
Having determined and agreed on the broad options to be included in the study, the team is undertaking more detailed option design and data collection to facilitate modeling of costs associated with each scenario. 5
End Use Study A ‘water end use study’ involving a survey of water use in 200 households in South Can Tho has been completed by staff and students from Can Tho University in collaboration with Can Tho Water Supply and Sewerage Company. The end-use study investigates how water is used in different kinds and sizes of households, for example low income, middle income and high income. Within each housing group, the study examines the range of different water uses, water-use technologies and the proportions of overall water consumption associated with end-use. This information is critical for understanding realistic materials flows and how separation of different streams (for example grey water and black water) might work in practice. Initial data analysis indicates some interesting results which are very different from standard end use assumptions in Australia, for example the kitchen appears to be the largest household water use, and the number of floors in the building is a strong determinant of flowrates, since water flows under gravity from roof tanks. These results underscore the need for local data collection and understanding of water supply practices as well as water use habits and norms. Results of the study will inform assessment of the quantity of wastewater streams and identification of appropriate treatment technologies at different scales and configurations. Spatial breakdown of areas where decentralized systems will be considered Spatial analysis using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is being undertaken to determine the most appropriate boundary between areas to be connected to the Cai Sau WWTP and those with decentralized systems (for options 3, 4 and 5 which combine centralized and decentralized systems). Parameters in the analysis include predicted population density (with reference to planned administrative and business districts), the staging of developments over time (when each development plot is predicted to be complete), pumping distances required for different configurations, the availability of green space (which is important for technologies such as subsurface constructed wetlands), the location of major canals suitable for discharge and the location of major roads. Figure 3 illustrates anticipated staging and population density for different parts of South Can Tho. Based on these and other parameters, Figure 4 shows the preliminary boundary between areas to be linked to Cai Sau WWTP and those where decentralized systems will be considered (for options 3, 4 and 5).
*
Blank residential development lots indicate gaps in currently available population data.
Figure 3: Development Staging and Population Density in the Study Area*
6
Figure 4: Boundary between centralized and decentralized areas for ‘combined’ options
Technology Selection Technologies to include in the study were discussed during team workshops in Can Tho in early 2010. Workshop participants from CTU, WSSC, DoC and DoNRE identified a suite of considerations for selecting technologies for analysis and agreed on an initial draft set of technology types. Considerations for selecting technologies are summarised in Table 2. Table 2: Considerations for selecting technologies to include in the study Proven
Whether the technology been proven successful at full-scale application (ideally in a tropical developing country)
Land and landscape
Land area requirements (including required buffer zones) Landscape aesthetics Avoids potential breeding of mosquitoes Avoids odour issues Ability to cope with high water table Ability to cope with flat topography Ability to cope with high rainfall peaks Resilient to the impacts of climate change Low energy requirements to mitigate climate change impacts Ability to cope with intermittent electricity Operation/Maintenance requirements (skills and frequency) Monitoring requirements (skills and frequency) Meets appropriate effluent quality (QCVN 14) Preference for locally available materials and technologies (Decision 1930) Available to treat wastewater at appropriate scale (volume for predicted population) for South Can Tho developments and density Reliability – ability to cope with variability in influent flow/quality
Geography and climate
Energy Skills required Regulations
Function
Discussions during team workshops initially focused on the appropriateness of individual treatment technologies, before considering options for complete treatment trains. Options for both combined grey and black water and separated streams were considered. One example of a treatment train that was selected involves the use of anaerobic systems such as anaerobic baffled reactors plus anaerobic filters followed by subsurface constructed wetlands and polishing prior to disinfection. Other possibilities still under consideration include fixed film systems with innovative designs and urine diversion and storage. A key factor affecting the design of a treatment train is the relatively recent introduction of domestic wastewater quality guidelines (QCVN 14), which set extraordinarily stringent standards for faecal coliforms to be less than 3000 MPN/ 100mL. 7
Next steps Final decisions about which technologies and treatment trains to include in the study will shortly be completed and modelling of the different options will be undertaken to determine costs associated with each scenario. In parallel, the study team is preparing for a sustainability assessment workshop to be held in Can Tho in June 2010. During this workshop, costs of each option will be considered along with criteria relating to institutional, socio-economic and environmental sustainability of sanitation alternatives to assist local stakeholders to determine the best fit for purpose solution. Finally, as described above, the last stage of the research process will involve preparation of generic material to support robust sanitation planning processes in Vietnam and more widely. The following discussion provides a backdrop for such guidance material, indicating the drivers and challenges to selection of fit-for-purpose sanitation systems observed to date in the case study context. SANITATION PLANNING IN CONTEXT – REFLECTIONS ON DRIVERS AND CHALLENGES FOR SELECTING FIT FOR PURPOSE SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS IN CAN THO The overall aim of the Can Tho sanitation options study is to facilitate selection of contextappropriate, fit for purpose, cost effective and sustainable sanitation infrastructure solutions. As such, based on the experience of the study team to date, this section considers aspects of the Can Tho and Vietnamese regulatory, development and institutional context that present drivers and challenges for comparison of options and selection of fit for purpose sanitation systems. Drivers for selecting fit for purpose sustainable sanitation systems A number of provisions in national level urban sanitation regulations indicate openness to a range of sanitation alternatives and selection of fit for purpose systems. The national technical regulation on domestic wastewater (QCVN 14) is a performance based standard. Rather than prescribing that particular technologies must be used, local authorities are able to select from a range of alternative technology types and treatment trains so long as they meet the required effluent standard. In addition, Prime Ministerial Decision 1930 ‘Approval of Orientation for Drainage Development’ stipulates that “technology for wastewater treatment is selected appropriately to suit natural condition, scale, characteristic and economical condition of the city”. It promotes research into centralized and decentralized systems, with particular interest in the application of decentralized systems in handicraft villages, and identifies a target to recycle 20-30% of wastewater in urban areas for non-potable uses such as street cleaning and plant watering. More generally, an opportunity exists in that Decree 88 – the overarching regulation guiding development and management of urban sanitation – has not yet been fully operationalised. There is still scope to promote management systems that suit different infrastructure configurations, including for example centralized management of decentralized systems, or appropriate ways of sharing costs and responsibilities between users, developers, water utilities and other government agencies including the People’s Committee. This contrasts with countries with long histories of sanitation regulation such as Australia, where the existence of well-defined and long established rules impede selection of fit for purpose sanitation systems. For example, new opportunities (e.g. reuse systems) have fallen outside the bounds of what is legally possible, despite technological advancements. The benefit of a context in which regulations have not yet been fully implemented is that sanitation options that may have been otherwise excluded can be considered. The anticipated impacts of climate change constitute a potential driver for selection of fit for purpose sanitation systems, in that decision makers must consider how infrastructure investments will fare under potential future climate scenarios. Impacts of climate change on Can Tho City are predicted to include an increase in average temperatures and greater extremes in rainfall, with reduced rainfall in the dry season (December – April) and increased rainfall in the wet season (May – November) (CTU and PCC, 2009). By the end of the century dry season rainfall is predicted to reduce by 5.5-9.3%, and wet season rainfall is predicted to increase by 10.6-18% (CTU and PCC, 8
2009). Under a medium emissions scenario where sea level is expected to rise 30cm by 2050 (MoNRE, 2009), many areas in Can Tho are predicted to be inundated, affecting construction sites with elevation under 1.8m. Planners must account for the vulnerability of infrastructure under a range of scenarios, and select options most likely to be sustainable given changing rainfall and flood patterns. Finally, amongst stakeholders there is genuine concern and interest in better understanding the relative life cycle costs of different kinds of sanitation systems. Large-scale centralized wastewater treatment systems such as that being constructed in Can Tho so far have relied on foreign aid or investment. Such aid or investment may not be easily acquired into the future as Vietnam moves into middle income status and as such, there is a strong driver for better economic analyses to determine the relative costs of different system types and scales to justify investments. Furthermore, the administrative decentralization and equitization processes also taking place in Vietnam are likely to mean that in the future utilities and the city or Provincial People’s Committees will need to give greater consideration to capital costs of investment and to incorporate these into their decision making. Separately, there have been important developments in how and when environmental and sustainability considerations are taken into account in planning and investment decisions, particularly through the Strategic Environmental Assessment obligations now in place for provinces and provincial category cities such as Can Tho. Challenges to selecting fit for purpose sustainable sanitation systems While some provisions of the regulatory regime offer drivers for selecting fit for purpose sanitation systems, others present challenges. For example, technical regulation QVCN 14 has relatively stringent quality requirements, which presents a difficulty for promoting affordable, locally available, and locally operated and maintained sanitation options such as anaerobic systems (e.g. those described by Nguyen et. al., 2006). Such systems would significantly improve the quality of wastewater as compared with the current situation of poorly performing septic systems, but cannot meet most parameters in the regulation. In this situation it is probable that the status quo, whereby wastewater is discharged untreated into waterways, remains in place for longer than might otherwise be the case if standards were more flexible. The fact that Decree 88 has not yet been fully implemented may also present challenges for sanitation planning. This is because many aspects of urban sanitation management remain unclear including wastewater tariff structures, asset ownership, and roles and responsibilities for operation, maintenance and monitoring of infrastructure and wastewater quality. For example, under current arrangements capital infrastructure costs and resettlement costs (which can be larger than construction costs) are provided by the Provincial People’s Committee (PPC) or national ministries (sourced from donor or other funds), while operation and maintenance is the responsibility of the utility. The utility must apply for an operating budget each year from the PPC (who takes revenue from water tariffs). According to Decree 88, utilities must move to greater cost recovery, but this is likely to take time. Within the current system, wastewater treatment systems that have high capital cost but lower operating cost will be preferred from the perspective of the water utility, whether or not these options represent the best fit for purpose or least cost to society when taking into account both capital and operational costs. However, this situation will change in the future, as in addition to the cost recovery drivers in Decree 88 the equitization process (essentially a form of privatization or socialization) taking place with publicly owned entities across Vietnam will eventually place greater responsibility with the utilities themselves. A long term capacity building project (funded by GTZ) that is taking place in the Can Tho Water Supply and Sewerage Company is attempting to address these issues. Sanitation systems that require smaller or consolidated land areas are also likely to be preferred over distributed systems that may require use of land owned by private developers. Land area required by different systems was ranked as the most important consideration in choice of technologies by representatives from WSSC and CTU during discussions about selection of technology types. Residential development is undertaken by the private sector, and as such 9
negotiations would be required to have land set aside for wastewater treatment. Institutionally, it is currently simpler to acquire a single large land area for a centralized treatment system than to acquire smaller plots for multiple systems, even if those systems offer better fit for purpose. The utility and government agencies typically lack staff with the requisite skills and capacity to manage sanitation infrastructure. Other than septic tanks and a drainage network, sanitation infrastructure has not previously existed in Can Tho. It is therefore likely to be challenging to secure personnel with skills and experience related to planning, designing, building and managing systems. Wastewater teams are learning rapidly, however in this situation, single centralized systems using known technologies may seem more attractive and feasible to manage than multiple technologies at a range of scales. In discussions with Can Tho Water Supply and Sewerage Company to identify key considerations for selecting wastewater technologies, a clear preference was expressed for systems requiring low skill levels to operate and maintain. Skill level required was seen as more critical than frequency of maintenance, with the explanation that labour is cheap but skilled workers are hard to find. This reality is in direct contrast with the preference to limit l and area, as technologies that can be operated and maintained by low-skilled workers are likely to require greater land area, while more complex technologies requiring skilled staff and more complex maintenance need far less land. Compounding the lack of skilled personnel is a general lack of data on which to base analysis and make an informed choice about what constitutes the best fit for purpose sanitation system. Information relating specifically to Can Tho is likely more detailed than for other cities, for example technical assistance from GTZ as part of the ‘Wastewater and Solid Waste Management in Provincial Centers’ project funded a community baseline survey on knowledge, attitudes and practices to wastewater and environmental sanitation including willingness to pay for services (SDRC, 2009). However there remain significant gaps in information relating to household water use and associated wastewater produced, and little empirical data on the quality of component streams, for example septic effluent, blackwater and greywater. What is clear is that monsoonal climates, high water tables, different water use habits and a history of combining stormwater and sewage means that standard design estimates drawn from other countries will likely not be appropriate for the Vietnamese context. Planning processes in general and poor coordination between planning and construction offer significant challenges for selection of optimal sanitation solutions. Current decision making processes in Can Tho and Vietnam more widely lack cross-agency and cross- sectoral coordination. Each level of government prepares two main sets of master plans, one dealing with socio-economic development and the other with construction/space. While in principle the socio-economic development plan is the overarching plan, coordination between the two is often lacking and in addition separate plans are prepared for industry, tourism and other sectors. For example in Can Tho, an overarching spatial master plan for the city is currently being revised by Ho Chi Minh City University of Architecture with advice from an international consultant team. Meanwhile, the existing construction master plan and the socio-economic development plan are driving current investment, and an active private sector is proceeding to construct new urban residential precincts that may or may not fit with emerging master plans. Infrastructure planning that aims to build an evidence base around alternative options for a given site must rely on relevant master plans, but this may not match what is actually being constructed on the ground in parallel to (and even before) decisions being made. IMPLICATIONS – SELECTING FIT FOR PURPOSE SUSTAINABLE SANITATION SYSTEMS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES The current situation in Vietnam represents a critical point in time for sanitation planning and the opportunity exists to promote decision making processes that help determine the most costeffective, fit for purpose and sustainable sanitation solution. The best solutions for a particular place and purpose will differ depending on a range of contextual factors, and it is therefore essential to 10
move beyond a ‘preferred technology’ approach to one that provides a basis for comparison of different options. The study currently being implemented in Can Tho offers one such approach, providing a means by which to compare a range of sanitation alternatives with reference to their cost effectiveness and sustainability. This study is comparing a suite of sanitation options that balance ‘pragmatic’ with ‘advanced’ approaches and technologies. This reflects a view that when considering sanitation alternatives, planning processes need to be grounded in context and yet not straight-jacketed by it. As with any context, certain aspects of regulatory and institutional regimes in developing countries are likely to present challenges for particular sanitation options, especially decentralized solutions, and these need to be considered during the planning phase. There is likely to be a tension between working within current boundaries and considering options that may not quite fit within the current system but offer other benefits that are worthwhile pursuing. It is useful to include both in a decision making process to illustrate what could be possible both now and in the future. Building an evidence base around costs and benefits of different sanitation approaches and technologies in developing countries is critical to inform planning in rapidly growing cities such as those across Southeast Asia, and there is a need for more studies of this kind. Demonstration cities are needed to implement the suite of alternative sanitation approaches available including decentralized and resource recovery technologies, to provide grounded experiences of how these systems work at scale across the technological, economic (utility capital and operating costs and revenues as well as customer costs and services), behavioural, and managerial domains. The demonstration cities approach adopted by the EU SWITCH program, currently being adapted for Asia (UNESCO, 2010) could offer opportunities to develop case studies of this kind. There is also a critical need to build the capacity of utilities to undertake this kind of planning, using cost-effectiveness analysis to facilitate comparison of alternatives on an equal basis and considering social and environmental costs alongside construction costs. Developing cities have an opportunity to avoid repeating the mistakes of developed cities with enormous sunk investments in older ‘one size fits all’ sanitation infrastructure. Making the most of this opportunity requires a fit for purpose approach to sanitation planning, such as the one explored in this paper, which should be sensitive to context and deliver better financial, social, and environmental outcomes in the short and long term. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AusAID is acknowledged for funding this study through the Australian Development Research Awards program. The College of Environment and Natural Resources at Can Tho University and Can Tho Water Supply and Sewerage Company are gratefully acknowledged for their strong cooperation and contribution. REFERENCES Abeysuriya, K.R., Mitchell, C. A. and Willetts, J. R. 2010, 'Urban sanitation through the lens of Thomas Kuhn', in J.R. McNeill, J.A. Padua & M. Rangarajan (eds), Environmental History: As if Nature Existed, Oxford University Press New Delhi, India, pp. 65-84. Can Tho University (CTU) and the People’s Committee of Can Tho City (PCC) (2009) Summary Report: Climate Change Impacts and Vulnerabilities Assessment for Can Tho City, report prepared by the Research Institute for Climate Change at Can Tho University and the People’s Committee of Can Tho City. Cordell, D., Drangert, J.-O. & White, S. (2009), 'The Story of Phosphorus: Global food security and food for thought', Global Environmental Change, vol. 19, no. May 2009, pp.292-305. Government of Vietnam (2009) Prime Minister’s Decision: Approval of Orientation for Drainage Development in Viet Nam Urban and Industrial zones toward 2025 and vision toward 2050 No: 1930/QĐ-TTg, Hanoi, 20 November 2009. 11
Government of Vietnam (2009) Decision No. 758/QD-TTg approving the national program on the upgrading of urban centers during 2009-2020, Hanoi, 8 June 2009. Government of Vietnam (2008) QCVN 14: National technical regulation on domestic wastewater, Hanoi. Government of Vietnam (2007) Decree On Drainage and Sewerage for Urban Areas and Industrial Zones No: 88/2007/ND-CP, Hanoi, 28 May 2007. International Water Association (2006) Sanitation 21: Simple Approaches to Complex Sanitation draft framework for analysis, framework developed by the IWA Sustainable Excreta Management Taskforce, http://www.iwahq.org/Home/Development/Technical_Expertise/Sanitation_21/. UNESCO (2010) Report of the SWITCH-in-Asia Regional Partnership Workshop, Jakarta, Indonesia, 8–10 December 2010, edited by Shahbaz Khan and Giuseppe Arduino, available at www.switch-in-asia.org Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE) 2009, Climate Change, Sea Level Rise Scenarios for Vietnam, Hanoi, June 2009. . Mitchell, C., Fane, S., Willetts, J., Plant, R. and Kazaglis, A. (2007) Costing for Sustainable Outcomes in Urban Water Systems: A Guidebook, Cooperative Research Centre for Water Quality and Treatment Research Report 35 prepared by the Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney. Nguyen, V. A., Pham, T. N., Nguyen, H. T., Morel, A. and Tonderski K. S. (2006) ‘Improved septic tank with constructed wetland, a promising decentralized wastewater treatment alternative in Vietnam’, http://www.epe.edu.vn/estvn/b.pdf. Nguyen, V. A., Ha, T. D., Nhue, T. H., Heinss, U., Morel, A., Moura, M. and Schertenleib, R. (2002) ‘Decentralized wastewater treatment – new concept and technologies for Vietnamese conditions’, paper presented at 5th Specialised Conference on Small Water and Wastewater Treatment Systems, Istanbul-Turkey, 24-26 September. Pinkham, R., Hurley, E., Watkins, K., Lovins, A., Magliaro, J., Etnier, C. and Nelson, V. (2004) Valuing Decentralized Wastewater Technologies: A Catalog of Benefits, Costs, and Economic Analysis Techniques, Rocky Mountain Institute. Toubkiss, J. (2006) Costing MDG Target 10 on Water Supply and Sanitation: Comparative Analysis, Obstacles and Recommendations, World Water Council. SDRC – Centre for Social Work and Community Development Research and Consultancy (2009) Report on Community Baseline Survey Incorporating Knowledge-Attitude-Practice and Customer Satisfaction – Ninh Kieu District, Can Tho City, Ministry of Construction in cooperation with GFA Consulting Group & Associates on behalf of GTZ. SuSanA (2008) Towards more sustainable sanitation solutions, SuSanA Vision Statement, http://www.susana.org/images/documents/02-vision/en-susana-statement-version-1-2-february2008.pdf. SuSanA (2008a) Sustainable sanitation for cities, SuSanA Thematic Paper, http://www.susana.org/images/documents/05-working-groups/wg06/final-docs/en-susanathematic-paper-WG06-cities-version-1.2.pdf SuSanA (2009) Costs and economics of sustainable sanitation, SuSanA fact sheet, http://www.susana.org/images/documents/05-working-groups/wg02/factsheet/susana-factsheetcosts-economics.pdf
12
THINK. CHANGE. DO
SELECTING SANITATION OPTIONS A CASE STUDY OF CAN THO, VIETNAM NAOMI CARRARD – INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE FUTURES
Acknowledgements • Others from the ISF team – Juliet Willetts, Cynthia Mitchell, Mick Paddon and Monique Retamal • College of Environment and Natural Resources at Can Tho University • Can Tho Water Supply and Sewerage Company • AusAID
13
What is the best way to provide sanitation services for rapidly growing urban areas? Key messages… •
The best sanitation solutions depend on a range of local factors – we need to move beyond a preferred technology approach to comparing different options.
•
Work from the ground up. How is water used? What is the quality of local wastewater streams? Design systems to match local conditions.
•
Building an evidence base around costs & benefits of sanitation approaches and technologies is critical to inform planning in rapidly growing cities.
Selecting sanitation systems for South Can Tho •
Research partnership between Institute for Sustainable Futures, Can Tho University and Can Tho Water Supply and Sewerage Company.
•
Costing and sustainability assessment methodology to compare different sanitation options for new developments in a rapidly growing peri-urban area.
The study aims to determine the most ‘fit for purpose’ and sustainable sanitation option
14
Can Tho City and South Can Tho
Rapid urbanization and rapid development
Rapid development in South Can Tho
There is an urgent need to determine how to manage wastewater from new developments
15
Comparing five sanitation options 1. Centralized 2. Decentralized 3. Combination (centralized + decentralized) with single wastewater stream 4. Combination with separate greywater and blackwater 5. Combination with separate greywater, urine and blackwater Including mainstream and ‘advanced’ options and technologies to investigate both what is likely and what is possible/innovative
Collecting water use and wastewater data • Survey of water use (by end use) in 200 households in South Can Tho • Testing septic tank influent and effluent and greywater quality in a range of households
Understanding the quality and quantity of wastewater streams is critical to design systems at appropriate scale and treatment level
16
Undertaking spatial analysis to determine appropriate boundaries (options 3, 4, 5)
Legend Population Density &
1 Dot = 0.0003
Land Use Non-residential
Staging 2015 2020 2025 2030
Putting physical, social and temporal data on the same map provides a basis for selecting sites for decentralized systems
Choosing technologies for decentralized sites Land and landscape
• Considerations for selecting technologies were identified during a workshop in January. • Techs include eg anaerobic baffled reactor (BASTAFAT); aerobic system with macro and micro-organisms; urine diversion and storage for productive use... • Now making final choices.
Geography and climate
Proven – successful at scale?
Energy use Skills for O&M – highly skilled vs labour intensive Regulations – must meet stringent quality requirements Function – right for the scale and density
Including conventional and innovative technologies to investigate both what is likely and what could be possible
17
Understanding the institutional context – drivers and challenges for choosing the best fit options
Understanding these factors is essential to inform planning processes and decisions about management arrangements
What next? Modelling, sustainability assessment, documenting the process • Analysis of end use data and modelling to determine unit costs for each option. • Sustainability assessment with various interested groups and government agencies (June 2010). • Documenting the process to share findings from the Can Tho experience. Already positive outcomes due to participatory approach – bringing together multiple perspectives to inform decisions and facilitate sharing of skills and knowledge
18
Key messages •
The best sanitation solutions depend on a range of local factors – we need to move beyond a preferred technology approach to comparing different options.
•
Work from the ground up. How is water used? What is the quality of local wastewater streams? Design systems to match local conditions.
•
Building an evidence base around costs & benefits of sanitation approaches and technologies is critical to inform planning in rapidly growing cities.
Thank you
Naomi Carrard Institute for Sustainable Futures University of Technology, Sydney (p) +61 2 9514 4977
[email protected]
19
