In this paper, we deal with the cost of sanitation and compare it to an alternative asset investment option: a (low cost) motorcycle.
====Financial inclusion====Financial inclusion encompasses offering One of the most common means of transport in for instance Kenya or Uganda is a wide range motor cycle. In view of financial services to its affordability, Chinese motorcycles have become the hitherto financially excludedstandard in Africa. These financial services range from financial literacyWith a given manufacturing cost in China and a known cost in shipping, micro credit, micro leasing, micro savings, micro insurance, money transfer and micro pensionslocal sales prices are an indicator of the state of the local economy. In The resale value of the motorcycles is - just as in the case of sanitation financing seriessystems - quite low. So, against this we are linking financial inclusion formulating our hypothesis: if your sanitation system (barring the arborloo and toilets linked to a biogas system) is half or less of the cost of a motorcycle, the sanitationsystem is well priced. Financially excluded will have great difficulties Or, in acquiring high other words, if two sanitation systems cost sanitation assetsmore than one cheap motorcycle, yet sanitation that is affordable may give rise the emphasis needs to new means be on lowering the cost of financing and perhaps even financial inclusion. So let us take a closer look at costingthe sanitation systems per se.
====Complexity sanitation costing====Sanitation costing is complex, because sanitation systems Chances are complex. The complexity stems from amongst othersthat:# Unseen and unknown items (underground systems) quite often the dimensions of a highly technical nature which makes them unknown to decision-makers.the system are not technically correct;# Different local conditions: The socioerring on the side of over-cultural, economiccautiousness (engineered over-financial, technical-environmental (population density, soil type, relief, water tabledesign), institutional and legal dimensions have to be worked out in a local setting.;# Even in similar conditions, different technology options may emerge. In the end, the main interest cost of decisionmakers lies with investment and (hopefully) operation and maintenance costs of the systemsdoing business is too high;# profit margins are excessive.
====Sanitation decision support Thus this comparison offers a basic, though practical tool====to evaluate costing.To assist in making technology choices, WASTE developed the [http[Image://www.waste.nl/en/product/the-sanitation-decision-support-tool Sanitation Decision Support Toolfinancing papers4b|none|400px]].The tool is organised as follows: <br># Division into functional groups (user-interface (“toilet”), collection, storage, emptying, transport, treatment, reuse/disposal).#. Set of fact-sheets (i.e. septic tank, simplified sewer, pit, composting, urine reuse…) for each of the functional groups enabling the choice.# Different flow parameters (grey water, black water, storm water, faeces, urine…).