2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102152
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Risky responsibilities for rural drinking water institutions: The case of unregulated self-supply in Bangladesh

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A second policy implication is to recognize the recent dominant role of private investment in private tubewells in meeting the MDG of improved access, and the potential to explore synergies with public expenditure (Fischer et al., 2020). While shallow tubewells are not part of public infrastructure investments because of known water quality concerns, household investments reveal an unmet demand for more convenient (closer) infrastructure to serve multiple household needs (cooking, washing, bathing, and as well as drinking).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A second policy implication is to recognize the recent dominant role of private investment in private tubewells in meeting the MDG of improved access, and the potential to explore synergies with public expenditure (Fischer et al., 2020). While shallow tubewells are not part of public infrastructure investments because of known water quality concerns, household investments reveal an unmet demand for more convenient (closer) infrastructure to serve multiple household needs (cooking, washing, bathing, and as well as drinking).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bangladesh stands as a global example for its remarkable success in adoption of tubewells, fuelled by the growth of local supply chains that enabled households to invest in low-cost shallow tubewells. With 1.74 million public tubewells installed by the government's Department for Health and Engineering (DPHE) and an estimated eight times more private tubewells (MLGRDC, 2011), the coverage ranges from 6.7 people per tubewell in areas with shallow freshwater aquifers to 12.4 people per tubewell in coastal areas exposed to high groundwater salinity (Fischer et al, 2020). Though self-supply is not formally recognized as a service delivery model, Fischer et al (2020) estimates that nationally rural households contributed over US$170 million in private tubewell installations in 2018 with an additional US$83 million being spent on operation and maintenance per year.…”
Section: Research Settingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yet only 22% of the 5213 functional tubewells are used for drinking, and of these 33% have salinity below the recommended threshold of 1500 µS/cm, indicating household preferences for water sources on-premises even if they are not used for drinking. The growing demand for higher service levels is in line with the country's economic growth, with vibrant local markets supplying shallow tubewells at low costs (Fischer et al, 2020).…”
Section: Comparative Growth In Public and Private Capital Investmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the support of key development players as international donors, implementing agencies and governments [17,18] recent scrutiny of the long-term functionality of rural water supply underlines weaknesses of the CBM model [19][20][21] and calls for improvements in the financial model. Similarly, a number of studies assessing rural water financing challenges in Sub-Saharan Africa suggest that a high proportion of communities struggle to establish and maintain a system for collecting user fees and raise the required funds for sustainable O&M cost recovery [22,23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%