Global implementation of two shared socioeconomic pathways for future sanitation and wastewater flows.

Households are an important source of nutrient loading to surface water. Sewage systems without or with only primary wastewater treatment are major polluters of surface water. Future emission levels will depend on population growth, urbanisation, increases in income and investments in sanitation, sewage systems and wastewater treatment plants. This study presents the results for two possible shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs). SSP1 is a scenario that includes improvement of wastewater treatment and SSP3 does not include such improvement, with fewer investments and a higher population growth. The main drivers for the nutrient emission model are population growth, income growth and urbanisation. Under the SSP1 scenario, 5.7 billion people will be connected to a sewage system and for SSP3 this is 5 billion. Nitrogen and phosphorus emissions increase by about 70% under both SSP scenarios, with the largest increase in SSP1. South Asia and Africa have the largest emission increases, in the developed countries decrease the nutrient emissions. The higher emission level poses a risk to ecosystem services.

[The necessity of new approaches to the elaboration of the projects for the sanitary (mountainous sanitary) protection districts around the therapeutic and health-promotion facilities, health resorts and their natural medical resources].

The international experience gained during the past two centuries indicates that the most efficient and rational way to ensure the protection of the territories occupied by the therapeutic and health-promotion facilities, spa centres, and health resorts together with their natural medical resources is to set up sanitary (mountainous sanitary) protection districts or zones along the perimeter of these territories. Beginning from 2000, numerous changes and amendments have been annually introduced in the Russian legislation intended to ensure efficacious control over the rational exploitation of the territories of therapeutic and health-promotion value and their natural medical resources. These initiatives have negative effect on the activities of these organizations and the quality of the services they are expected to provide. Taken together these effects lead to the degradation of the spa and health resort business. Bearing in mind the current conditions for economic activities, it is proposed, in contrast to the former global approach, to envisage in the aforementioned projects the establishment of the sanitary (mountainous sanitary) protection districts or zones and determine their borders based on the results of the assessment of their potential for the protection of therapeutic factors and other valuable resources. Equally important is the maximum reduction of the areas of the second and third zones taking into account their relevant objective characteristics. In certain cases, the protective district may coincide with the second zone. As far as the federal health resorts and large territories of special health-promotion value are concerned, some of them may have two or more sanitary (mountainous sanitary) protection districts. Both the owners and the users of these territories should be provided the necessary and sufficient possibilities for the rational nature use at the grounds and in the adjacent water areas suitable for the development of health resort business in the conditions guaranteed by the national legislation.

[The health system of Costa Rica]. / Sistema de salud de Costa Rica.

This paper describes the Costa Rican health system which provides health, water and sanitation services. The health component of the system includes a public and a private sector. The public sector is dominated by the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social (CCSS), an autonomous institution in charge of financing, purchasing and delivering most of the personal health services in Costa Rica. CCSS is financed with contributions of the affiliates, employers and the state, and manages three regimes: maternity and illness insurance, disability, old age and death insurance, and a non-contributive regime. CCSS provides services in its own facilities but also contracts with private providers. The private sector includes a broad set of services offering ambulatory and hospital care. These services are financed mostly out-of-pocket, but also with private insurance premiums. The Ministry of Health is the steward of the system, in charge of strategic planning, sanitary regulation, and research and technology development. Among the recent policy innovations we can mention the establishment of the basic teams for comprehensive health care (EBAIS), the de-concentration of hospitals and public clinics, the introduction of management agreements and the creation of the Health Boards.

Sistema de salud de Costa Rica / The health system of Costa Rica

En este trabajo se describe el sistema de salud de Costa Rica, que presta servicios de salud, agua y saneamiento. El componente de servicios de salud incluye un sector público y uno privado. El sector público está dominado por la Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social (CCSS), institución autónoma encargada del financiamiento, compra y prestación de la mayoría de los servicios personales. La CCSS se financia con contribuciones de los afiliados, los empleadores y el Estado, y administra tres regímenes: el seguro de enfermedad y maternidad, el seguro de invalidez, vejez y muerte, y el régimen no contributivo. La CCSS presta servicios en sus propias instalaciones o contrata prestadores del sector privado con los que establece contratos denominados "compromisos de gestión". El sector privado comprende una amplia red de prestadores que ofrecen servicios ambulatorios y de especialidad con fines lucrativos. Estos servicios se financian sobre todo con pagos de bolsillo, pero también con primas de seguros privados. El Ministerio de Salud es el rector del sistema y como tal cumple con funciones de dirección política, regulación sanitaria, direccionamiento de la investigación y desarrollo tecnológico. Dentro de las innovaciones relativamente recientes que se han implantado en Costa Rica destacan la implantación de los equipos básicos de atención integral de salud (EBAIS), la desconcentración de los hospitales y clínicas públicos, la introducción de los acuerdos de gestión y la creación de las Juntas de Salud.

This paper describes the Costa Rican health system which provides health, water and sanitation services. The health component of the system includes a public and a private sector. The public sector is dominated by the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social (CCSS), an autonomous institution in charge of financing, purchasing and delivering most of the personal health services in Costa Rica. CCSS is financed with contributions of the affiliates, employers and the state, and manages three regimes: maternity and illness insurance, disability, old age and death insurance, and a non-contributive regime. CCSS provides services in its own facilities but also contracts with private providers. The private sector includes a broad set of services offering ambulatory and hospital care. These services are financed mostly out-of-pocket, but also with private insurance premiums. The Ministry of Health is the steward of the system, in charge of strategic planning, sanitary regulation, and research and technology development. Among the recent policy innovations we can mention the establishment of the basic teams for comprehensive health care (EBAIS), the de-concentration of hospitals and public clinics, the introduction of management agreements and the creation of the Health Boards.

How do we sell the hygiene message? With dollars, dong or excreta?

In North and Central Vietnam it is common among farmers to use excreta from the family double vault composting latrine (DVC) as fertilizer in the fields. The official Vietnamese health guidelines stipulate a six-month period of composting before applying excreta to two of their three annual crops. However, farmers in this region cannot afford to follow these guidelines and this paper presents the reasons why.In their efforts to ensure optimal hygienic conditions, by providing a guideline, the Vietnamese health authorities have not put sufficient attention to the 'excreta economy' in relation to farmers' livelihoods. The free fertilizer in the household DVC represents a value of approximately US$ 15.5 per year--or the equivalent of 15 percent of the annual household income for the poorest 20 percent of farmers. For this reason, the economic benefits derived from free fertilizer outweigh the hygiene message for most Vietnamese farmers. Even at national level the excreta economy has an impact. If Vietnam were to replace human excreta with imported fertilizer, it would involve an extra national expenditure of at least US$ 83 million a year.In order to convince Vietnamese farmers to adopt different fertilizing methods when reusing human excreta, it is necessary for the Vietnamese health authorities to change their hygiene message. They need to replace their current health sector-specific approach with a holistic one that takes the premises of farmers' livelihoods into account. If they do not the hygiene message will simply be lost.

Problems with provision: barriers to drinking water quality and public health in rural Tasmania, Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Access to safe drinking water is essential to human life and wellbeing, and is a key public health issue. However, many communities in rural and regional parts of Australia are unable to access drinking water that meets national standards for protecting human health. The aim of this research was to identify the key issues in and barriers to the provision and management of safe drinking water in rural Tasmania, Australia. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key local government employees and public health officials responsible for management of drinking water in rural Tasmania. Participants were asked about their core public health duties, regulatory responsibilities, perceptions and management of risk, as well as the key barriers that may be affecting the provision of safe drinking water. RESULTS: This research highlights the effect of rural locality on management and safety of fresh water in protecting public health. The key issues contributing to problems with drinking water provision and quality identified by participants included: poor and inadequate water supply infrastructure; lack of resources and staffing; inadequate catchment monitoring; and the effect of competing land uses, such as forestry, on water supply quality. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This research raises issues of inequity in the provision of safe drinking water in rural communities. It highlights not only the increasing need for greater funding by state and commonwealth government for basic services such as drinking water, but also the importance of an holistic and integrated approach to managing drinking water resources in rural Tasmania.

Assessment of the efficiency and economic viability of various methods of treatment of sanitary landfill leachate.

This study assesses the efficiency of various physico-chemical, biological and other tertiary methods for treating leachate. An evaluation study on the treatability of the leachate from methane phase bed (MPB) reactor indicated that at an optimum hydraulic retention time of 6 days, the efficiency of the reactor in terms of biological oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal was 91.29 and 82.69%, respectively. Recycling of the treated leachate through the municipal solid waste layers in the leachate recycling unit (LRU) resulted in a significant increase in the biodegradation of organics present in the leachate. Optimum BOD and COD removal efficiencies were achieved at the third recycle; additional recycling of the leachate did not produce any significant improvement. Physico-chemical treatment of the leachate demonstrated that alum and lime (Option 2) were more economical than coagulants lime and MgCO(3). A cost analysis of the economics of the various treatments revealed that the alternative treatment consisting of a MPB bed followed by a LRU and aerated lagoon is the most cost-effective treatment. However, the alternative consisting of a MPB followed by the LRU and a soil column, which is slightly more costly, would be the most appropriate treatment when adequate land is readily available.