Water Supply and Sanitation in the Philippines | Turning Finance into Services for the Future


A difficulty with the approach above is that Villaluna (2013) does not provide guidance for a rural-urban analysis. Hence the strategy adopted in the analysis was to first apportion the shares across the technologies at the national level. This was then allocated across regions by assuming that the ratio of the urban to rural users for a particular technology in 2025 is the same as in 2008. In other words, if there are five times as many people in urban areas compared to rural areas had access to piped facilities in 2008, then there will still be five times as many people in urban regions compared to rural regions that will have access to piped facilities in 2025.

Unit capital costs represent expenditures for materials and labor employed in the construction of the different facilities. The values used in the analysis were calculated using the raw data on the costs of Levels 1 to 3 systems provided in Villaluna (2013). The dataset contained information on 216 projects which were financed by the following: (a) SALINTUBIG project of the DILG, (b) KALAHI-CIDDS project of the DWSD, (c) Mindanao Basic Urban Services Sector Project of the DILG, (d) A Single Drop NGO, (e) Land Bank of the Philippines, (f) selected water districts, and (g) various private institutions.

Source InstitutionWorld Bank
Source URLhttp://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2015/11/10/090224b0831a65ec/1_0/Rendered/PDF/Water0supply0a0vices0for0the0future.pdf
Page Count90
Place of PublicationPasig City
Original Publication DateFebruary 1, 2015