Comparison and cost analysis of drinking water quality monitoring requirements versus practice in seven developing countries

58Citations
Citations of this article
201Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Drinking water quality monitoring programs aim to support provision of safe drinking water by informing water quality management. Little evidence or guidance exists on best monitoring practices for low resource settings. Lack of financial, human, and technological resources reduce a country's ability to monitor water supply. Monitoring activities were characterized in Cambodia, Colombia, India (three states), Jordan, Peru, South Africa, and Uganda according to water sector responsibilities, monitoring approaches, and marginal cost. The seven study countries were selected to represent a range of low resource settings. The focus was on monitoring of microbiological parameters, such as E. coli, coliforms, and H2S-producing microorganisms. Data collection involved qualitative and quantitative methods. Across seven study countries, few distinct approaches to monitoring were observed, and in all but one country all monitoring relied on fixed laboratories for sample analysis. Compliance with monitoring requirements was highest for operational monitoring of large water supplies in urban areas. Sample transport and labor for sample collection and analysis together constitute approximately 75% of marginal costs, which exclude capital costs. There is potential for substantive optimization of monitoring programs by considering field-based testing and by fundamentally reconsidering monitoring approaches for non-piped supplies. This is the first study to look quantitatively at water quality monitoring practices in multiple developing countries. © 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Crocker, J., & Bartram, J. (2014). Comparison and cost analysis of drinking water quality monitoring requirements versus practice in seven developing countries. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 11(7), 7333–7346. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110707333

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free