Changes

Financial approaches

68 bytes removed, 01:21, 6 May 2016

→‎Partial Subsidies in latrine programmes

====Users contribute in cash or kind or pay connection fee. ====

Good approach to enhance ownership. Also needed for replacement. Some examples of no-subsidy for hardware, but poorest sections may require subsidy. The governments of India and Bangladesh suspended subsidies because they did not reach the poor but then re-introduced them at lower levels (the equivalent of about USD 10) in order to reach the poorest of the poor. Management of subsidies remains a challenge. In Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso): a surtax on water supply is applied by ONEA, an autonomous public water and sanitation company, to subsidize on-site sanitation facilities (25% contribution and supervision of trained masons). 20,000 facilities have been constructed in schools and households. Management of funds presents difficulties, but approach was extended to other towns (http://www.wupafrica.org/toolkit/resources/pdf-files/good_practices/good_practice_Africa.pdf) Good potential to reach the poorer sections of society 

=== Pay and use toilets/public bath houses ===

• ← Older edit
• Newer edit →

Winona

Akvopedia-spade, akvouser, bureaucrat, emailconfirmed, staff, susana-working-group-1, susana-working-group-10, susana-working-group-11, susana-working-group-12, susana-working-group-2, susana-working-group-3, susana-working-group-4, susana-working-group-5, susana-working-group-6, susana-working-group-7, susana-working-group-8, susana-working-group-9, susana-working-group-susana-member, administrator, widget editor

30,949

edits