Cited by 349Child Nutrition and Water AccessWater Resource Management and QualityFecal contamination and water quality

Global cost-benefit analysis of water supply and sanitation interventions

Hutton, Guy, Haller, Laurence, Bartram, Jamie·2007·Journal of Water and Health

Abstract

The aim of this study was to estimate the economic benefits and costs of a range of interventions to improve access to water supply and sanitation facilities in the developing world. Results are presented for eleven developing country WHO sub-regions as well as at the global level, in United States Dollars (US$) for the year 2000. Five different types of water supply and sanitation improvement were modelled: achieving the water millennium development goal of reducing by half in 2015 those without improved water supply in the year 1990; achieving the combined water supply and sanitation MDG; universal basic access to water supply and sanitation; universal basic access plus water purification at the point-of-use; and regulated piped water supply and sewer connection. Predicted reductions in the incidence of diarrhoeal disease were calculated based on the expected population receiving these interventions. The costs of the interventions included estimations of the full investment and annual running costs. The benefits of the interventions included time savings due to easier access, gain in productive time and reduced health care costs saved due to less illness, and prevented deaths. The results show that all water and sanitation improvements are cost-beneficial in all developing world sub-regions. In developing regions, the return on a US$1 investment was in the range US$5 to US$46, depending on the intervention. For the least developed regions, investing every US$1 to meet the combined water supply and sanitation MDG lead to a return of at least US$5 (AFR-D, AFR-E, SEAR-D) or US$12 (AMR-B; EMR-B; WPR-B). The main contributor to economic benefits was time savings associated with better access to water and sanitation services, contributing at least 80% to overall economic benefits. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that even under pessimistic data assumptions the potential economic benefits outweighed the costs in all developing world regions. Further country case-studies are recommended as a follow up to this global analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2166/wh.2007.009

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 28 · Cited by 349

Authors
Hutton, G., Haller, L., & Bartram, J.
Affiliations
  • Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (CH)
  • University of Geneva (CH)
  • World Health Organization (CH)
Corresponding author
Hutton, Guy
Venue
Journal of Water and Health
Published
2007-05-01
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
481-502
ISSN
  • 1477-8920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1996-7829
OpenAlex
W2171706443
Cited by
349
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 20
FWCI
6.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Water and Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Child Nutrition and Water Access
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Water Resource Management and Quality
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Fecal contamination and water quality
Keywords
water supply, sanitation, cost-benefit analysis, Millennium Development Goals, diarrhoeal diseases, household water treatment, piped water supply, sewer connection, time savings, developing countries, water access
MeSH terms
Cost-Benefit Analysis, Developing Countries, Diarrhea, Health Status, Humans, Sanitary Engineering, Time Factors, Water Supply, Global Health, Models, Econometric

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review