assessment of technology options 1 naomi radke, seecon international gmbh

Assessment of Technology Options


1

Naomi Radke, seecon international GmbH


Find this presentation and more on www.sswm.info

Copy it, adapt it, use it – but acknowledge the source!Copyright

Included in the SSWM Toolbox are materials from various organisations and sources. Those materials are open source. Following the open-source concept for capacity building and non-profit use, copying and adapting is allowed provided proper acknowledgement of the source is made (see below). The publication of these materials in the SSWM Toolbox does not alter any existing copyrights. Material published in the SSWM Toolbox for the first time follows the same open-source concept, with all rights remaining with the original authors or producing organisations.

To view an official copy of the the Creative Commons Attribution Works 3.0 Unported License we build upon, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0. This agreement officially states that:

You are free to: • Share - to copy, distribute and transmit this document • Remix - to adapt this document. We would appreciate receiving a copy of any changes that you have made to improve

this document.

Under the following conditions: • Attribution: You must always give the original authors or publishing agencies credit for the document or picture you are

using.

Disclaimer

The contents of the SSWM Toolbox reflect the opinions of the respective authors and not necessarily the official opinion of the funding or supporting partner organisations.

Depending on the initial situations and respective local circumstances, there is no guarantee that single measures described in the toolbox will make the local water and sanitation system more sustainable. The main aim of the SSWM Toolbox is to be a reference tool to provide ideas for improving the local water and sanitation situation in a sustainable manner. Results depend largely on the respective situation and the implementation and combination of the measures described. An in-depth analysis of respective advantages and disadvantages and the suitability of the measure is necessary in every single case. We do not assume any responsibility for and make no warranty with respect to the results that may be obtained from the use of the information provided.

Copyright & Disclaimer



Contents

1. Introduction

2. Step 1: Identification of Sanitation Alternatives1. Substep 1: Understanding and shortening the list of

possible options

3. Step 2: Participatory Decision Making Process1. Substep 1: First participatory analysis2. Substep 2: System exposure3. Substep 3: Comparison of alternatives4. Substep 4: Final decision making process

4. References

3



Deciding on a technology within a community

The right decision on a suitable sanitation system is a key step towards sustainable sanitation. This decision approach takes into account:

•Technical issues (e.g. suitable systems with regard to the settlement conditions)

•Non-technical issues ( e.g. stakeholder preferences, financial and human capacity)

Information previously required:

•Settlement conditions

•Existing sanitation situation

•User priorities

•Financial and human capacity available

4

1. Introduction

Also non-technical aspects such as socio-cultural preferences have to be taken into account.Source: WSP (2007)



Understanding and shortening the list of possible options (1/3)

A sanitation system is a configuration of different technology components that carry out different processes along the waste flow.

5

2. Identification of Sanitation Alternatives

Technology components along the waste (product) flow.Source: NETSSAF (2008)

While there is a large range of technology options, in practice the choice of adequate options is limited by

1)existing infrastructure and

2)physical characteristics of the site



Understanding and shortening the list of possible options (2/3)To further narrow down the list of possible options, the following criteria should be taken into account for a holistic approach:

• Health

• Environment and Resources

• Technology and Operation

• Finance and Economy

• Society, Culture and Gender

Along these criteria, a technology can be rated and compared to other physically possible technologies. A list of evaluation factors for each criteria can be found in ZURBRUEGG and TILLEY (2007) (see reference list at the end of the presentation).

6




Understanding and shortening the list of possible options (3/3)

Product of this step:

A short list of feasible sanitation options given the local context (social, financial, environmental) and compared along each criterion.

Settlement conditions, existing sanitation situation and user priorities should have been previously assessed.

7




1. First Participatory Analysis (1/2)

Stakeholders can ask questions, discuss, propose modifications to the systems shortlisted by experts in the previous step.

Systems should be adapted according to the users’ priorities and capabilities (financial situation and ability of work for maintenance).

Systems shall then be ranked for each criterion (see criteria in Step 1: Identification of Sanitation Alternatives).

8

3. Participatory Decision Making Process

Source: NETSSAF (2008)



1. First Participatory Analysis (2/2)

Information needed to make a decision:

• Baseline data of the project area

• Description of the system options shortlisted by the consultants (result of previous step)

• Well arranged comparison of these alternatives, based on a fixed set of criteria (result of previous step)

Product of this step: One or several systems which is (are) considered most appropriate for the project area.

9




2. System Exposure

Goal: stakeholders should make an informed choice

System Exposure allows:

• For stakeholders to gain experience with various sanitation systems

• Creating awareness and demand for sanitation systems

• Contextualization of sanitation systems helps to propose adaptations

• Decisions to be made on actual experience than on assumptions

10





3. Comparison of alternatives

A second participatory workshop helps to collect and analyse the experiences after the system exposure.

Engineers and planners should be open for suggestions by the stakeholders for adapted designs.

Product of this step: narrowed down list of possible sanitation systems.

11





4. Final decision making process

Final workshop held with the decision-makers in the project area.

Information needed:

• Narrowed down list of (adapted) sanitation systems from previous step

• Cost estimations of sanitation systems, availability of construction material, tools, skilled labour and other essential components for the construction works

Goal: A system is agreed upon by experts (in terms of technical robustness) and stakeholders (in terms of usability and affordability)

12




13

NETSSAF (2008): The NETSSAF Participatory Planning Approach. A Tutorial for Sustainable Sanitation Planning. Bremerhaven: Network for the Development of Sustainable Approaches for large scale implementation of Sanitation in Africa (NETSSAF). URL: http://www.netssaftutorial.com/Introduction.405.0.html [Accessed: 30.07.2013]

ZURBRUEGG, C., TILLEY, E. (2007): Evaluation of existing low-cost conventional as well as innovative system and technologies. Duebendorf: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (EAWAG). URL: http://susana.org/lang-en/library?view=ccbktypeitem&type=2&id=1350 [Accessed: 20.08.2013]

WSP (Editor) (2007): Philippines Sanitation Source Book and Decision Aid. pdf presentation. Washington: Water and Sanitation Program. URL: http://www.pseau.org/outils/biblio/resume.php?d=2693&l=en&tout=1 [Accessed: 20.08.2013]

4. References

Assessment of Technology Options 14

“Linking up Sustainable Sanitation, Water Management & Agriculture”

SSWM is an initiative supported by:

Created by:

assessment of technology options 1 naomi radke, seecon international gmbh

Documents