Supply Chain Analysis for Rural Sanitation Products and Services in Lao pdr



Download 6.78 Mb.
Page4/41
Date23.04.2018
Size6.78 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   41

Contents


1

Supply Chain Analysis for Rural Sanitation Products and Services in Lao PDR 1

July 2014 1

List of Figures 6

List of Tables 7

Acronyms & Abbreviations 9

Acknowledgements 10

ບົດ​ສະ​ແດງຄວາມຮູ້​ບຸນ​ຄຸນ 1

Executive Summary 2

ບົດສະເໜີ​ໂດຍ​ສັງ​ເຂບ 12

1Introduction 22

2Methodology 31

3Possible limitations of the data 35

4The Sanitation Supply Chain 37

5The Latrine 55

Commonly Built Latrine 57

Item/Material 57

Quantity (#) 57

Unit of Measure 57

Area 57


Region – Province 68

Materials cost (LAK) 68

Labor cost (LAK) 68

Total cost (LAK) 68

Total cost (US$) 68

Northern 68

2,512,720 68

3,783,333 68

6,296,053 68

787 68


Bokeo 68

2,394,768 68

2,150,000 68

4,544,768 68

568 68

Luangnamtha 68



2,630,673 68

5,416,667 68

8,047,340 68

1,006 68


Central 68

2,819,177 68

3,397,000 68

6,216,177 68

777 68

Borikhamxay 68



2,649,631 68

4,242,000 68

6,891,631 68

861 68


Savannakhet 68

2,988,722 68

2,552,000 68

5,540,722 68

693 68

Southern 68



3,033,852 68

3,242,611 68

6,276,463 68

785 68


Attapeu 68

2,882,181 68

3,460,000 68

6,342,181 68

793 68

Salavan 68



3,013,458 68

3,090,909 68

6,104,367 68

763 68


Sekong 68

3,205,917 68

3,176,923 68

6,382,840 68

798 68

Total sample 68



2,813,110 68

3,451,144 68

6,264,254 68

6The Consumer 70

7Market structure, environment and reach 72

8Government and Development Partners are part of the chain 86

9Finance 90

10Business constraints 94

11Summary of Findings 99

12Recommendations 101

Appendix 1: Selected Sanitation Data from Lao Social Indicator Survey 115

Appendix 2: Material Suppliers Questionnaire 117

Appendix 3: Concrete Producers Questionnaire 139

Appendix 4: Masons Questionnaire 152

Appendix 5: Microfinance Questionnaire 173

Appendix 6: Focus Group discussion Guidelines 179

184

References 185




List of Figures


Figure 1: GDP per capita at purchasing power parity (PPP), 2012 22

Figure 2: Households Using Improved Sanitation Facilities, by Wealth Quintile, 2012 23

Figure 3: The impact of improved sanitation 25

Figure 4: Seven provinces for field work 29

Figure 5: Supply chain flow for building materials – Northern Provinces (n=20) 42

Figure 6 Supply chain flow for building materials – Central Provinces (n=19) 42

Figure 7 Supply chain flow for building materials– Southern Provinces (n=29) 43

Figure 8: Average percentage of concrete producers’ business related to latrine construction (n=37) 45

Figure 9: Masons who have received training (% of total per region/province) (n=71) 49

Figure 10: Supply Chain Map (conceptual) 53

Figure 11: Do you know about these different latrine options? (n=71) 56

Figure 12: Cost drivers for commonly-built latrine (LAK and cumulative % of total costs) 59

Figure 13: Cost drivers for core structure (LAK and cumulative % of total costs) 60

Figure 14: Poor rural households’ stated monthly income, by region 68

Figure 15: How much are you willing to pay for a latrine? (Rural poor, non-latrine owners) 69

Figure 16: Comparing costs with consumer expectations and willingness to pay (LAK) 70

Figure 17: Proportion of actors reporting no competitors in latrine products/services 72

Figure 18: Construction material shops reporting more than one main upstream supplier (n=68) 74

Figure 19: Percent of actors offering credit (delayed payment) to customers 82

Figure 20: Percent that have worked for Government or Development Partner project 87

Figure 21: Estimated sanitation and hygiene financing, 2008-09 88

Figure 22: ACLEDA Bank – Credit conditions 92

Figure 23: Business constraints (percent of actors reporting each as a main constraint) 94

Figure 24: Potential rural latrine market size (number of latrines) 101




List of Tables


Table 1: Lao PDR sanitation coverage 23

Table 2: Characteristics of the research districts 30

Table 3: Field work methodology overview 31

Table 4: In-depth Interviews – Total Sample 33

Table 5: Owner and Self Employed Material Suppliers – Distribution by gender (n=68) 38

Table 6: Other business activities – material suppliers (n=68) 39

Table 7: Types of other businesses owned by material suppliers (n=68) 39

Table 8: Source of capital – material suppliers (% of total) (n=68) 41

Table 9: Gender of the person who manages the business’s accounts/finances (% of total) (n=68) 41

Table 10: Owner and Self Employed Concrete Producers – Distribution by Gender (n=37) 44

Table 11: Types of other businesses activities by concrete producers (n=37) 46

Table 12: Source of capital – concrete producers (% of total) (n=37) 46

Table 13: Customers of concrete producers (average of reported %) (n=37) 47

Table 14: Concrete producers who have received training (n=37) 47

Table 15: Pit lining options (% of total) (n=71) 50

Table 16: Type of latrines masons able to build (% of total) (n=71) 51

Table 17: Ability of masons to repair and upgrade a latrine and average per year (n=71) 51

Table 18: Most common improvements made (% of total, multiple choice allowed) (n=71) 52

Table 19: Construction materials – Country of origin 53

Table 20: Type of latrines owned by the rural poor 56

Table 21: Latrine superstructures of the rural poor 57

Table 22: List of materials to build a typical latrine 57

Table 23: Latrine core and superstructure costs for a commonly-built latrine (LAK) 58

Table 24: Materials prices in different provinces (average of suppliers’ selling price), LAK 61

Table 25: Price paid by concrete producers for cement (LAK per ton) 61

Table 26: Price of concrete rings in different provinces (average of producers’ selling price) 62

Table 27: Labor required to build the “most commonly built” latrine, as quoted by masons (n=71) 62

Table 28: Average daily cost per person for latrine construction (n=71) 64

Table 29: Transport costs for large loads between major centers 65

Table 30: Examples of local transportation costs 66

Table 31: Commonly-built latrine total costs (materials + labor) 68

Table 32: Relationship between masons and other supply chain actors (% of total) 76

Table 33: Suppliers’ gross margins on selected materials (n=68) 76

Table 34: Availability of skilled and knowledgeable masons in poor rural villages 79

Table 35: Business or Marketing Plan – Positive Respondents (% of total) (n=68 and 37) 84

Table 36: Branches interviewed that have lent to households for toilet construction and to supply chain) 91

Table 37: Plans to expand operation in the district (% of total) 91

Table 38: Current Import Tariff and VAT Rates in Lao PDR (%) 97

Table 39: Potential finance approaches for onsite sanitation 108



Acronyms & Abbreviations


ADB

ASEAN


BCC

CLTS


Asian Development Bank

Association of South-East Asian Nations

Behavior Change Communication

Community-Led Total Sanitation



DHS

DP

EMC



Demographic and Health Survey

Development Partner

Emerging Markets Consulting


GoL

Government of Lao PDR

FGD

IMF


JMP

Laos /Lao PDR

LECS

LRC


LSIS

MDG


Focus Group Discussion

International Monetary Fund

Joint Monitoring Programme

Lao People’s Democratic Republic

Lao Expenditure and Consumption Survey

Lao Red Cross

Lao Social Indicator Survey

Millennium Development Goal



MICS

MFI


MoH

MoIC


Nam Saat

Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey

Micro-finance Institution

Ministry of Health

Ministry of Industry and Commerce

Center for Environmental Health and Water Supply, Department of Hygiene, Lao Ministry of Health (literally “clean water”)


NSC

NGO
OD

ODF

SRF


National Statistics Center

Non-Government Organization

Open defecation

Open-Defecation Free

Sanitation Revolving Fund


UNDP

UNICEF


United Nations Development Program

United Nations Children’s Fund



WASH

WHO


Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

World Health Organization



WSP

Water and Sanitation Program (World Bank)


Acknowledgements


Special thanks to all the stakeholders, development agencies and local associations, and local and national government officials for their time and invaluable support during the project.

The research teams would especially like to thank all the supply chain actors for their time and cooperation in participating in this study.

We also extend our sincere gratitude to all the project’s partners including, but not limited to: for Hygiene-Health Promotion Department, Ministry of Health, Dr. Phat; for National Center for Environmental Health and Water Supply (Nam Saat), Dr. Soutsakhone; for UNICEF, Bishnu Timilsina, Chief WASH Section of UNICEF; for Plan International, John McGown, WASH Manager; for SNV, Thea Bongertman, WASH Sector Leader. A number of other people provided comments on presentations during the project and on a draft of this report. We particularly thank Susanna Smets from WSP.

Last but not least, we thank Viengsamay Vongkhamsao, WSP Country Coordinator, and Bounthavong Sourisak, WSP Social Development Specialist.



Emerging Markets Consulting supply chain analysis team

ບົດສະແດງຄວາມຮູ້ບຸນຄຸນ



ຂໍຂອບໃຈເປັນພິເສດມາຍັງຜູ້ມີ​ສ່ວນ​ຮ່ວມ, ອົງການພັດທະນາ ແລະ ສະມາຄົມທ້ອງຖິ່ນກໍ​ຄືເຈົ້າ​ໜ້າ​ທີ່ລັດຖະບານ
ທັງສູນກາງ ແລະ ທ້ອງຖິ່ນທີ່ໄດ້ສະຫຼະເວລາອັນມີຄ່າປະກອບສ່ວນ​ຕະຫຼອດໄລຍະໂຄງການ.

ທີມງານການຄົ້ນຄ້ວາຍັງຂໍຂອບໃຈ​ພາກ​ສ່ວນຫຼັກ​ຂອງຕ່ອງ​ໂສ້​ການສະໜອງ​ທີ່​ສະຫຼະ​ເວ​ລາ ແລະ ​ໃຫ້​ການຮ່ວມມື
ເຂົ້າຮ່ວມໃນການສຶກສາຄົ້ນຄວ້າຄັ້ງນີ້.

ພວກເຮົາຍັງ​ຂໍສະ​ແດງ​ຄວາມ​ຮູ້​ບຸນ​ຄຸນຄູ່​ຮ່ວມ​ໂຄງ​ການ​ທັງ​ໝົດລວມ​ທັງ​ແຕ່​ບໍ່​ຈຳ​ກັດ​ສະ​ເພາະ: ກົມສົ່ງເສີມສຸຂະພາບ-ສຸຂະສຶກສາ, ກະຊວງສາທາລະນະສຸກ, ທ່ານດ​ຣ. ພັດ; ສູນນ້ຳສະອາດ ແລະ ສິ່ງແວດລ້ອມແຫ່ງຊາດ , ທ່ານດ​ຣ. ສຸດ​ສາ​ຄອນ; ອົງການ UNICEF, Bishnu Timilsina, ຫົວໜ້າ​ວຽກ​ງານຮັກສາ
ຄວາມສະອາດປະ​ຈຳ UNICEF; ອົງການ Plan International, John McGown, ຜູ້ຈັດການວຽກ​ງານຮັກສາ
ຄວາມສະອາດ; SNV, Thea Bongertman, ຫົວໜ້າທີມຂະແໜງຮັກສາຄວາມສະອາດ. ມີບຸກຄົນຈຳ​ນວນ​ໜຶ່ງທີ່ໄດ້​ປະ​ກອບ​ຄຳເຫັນໃນການນຳສະເໜີຕ່າງໆຕະຫຼອດໄລຍະໂຄງການ ແລະ ໃນການຮ່າງບົດລາຍງານສະ​ບັບນີ້. ພວກເຮົາຂໍຂອບໃຈໂດຍສະເພາະ Susanna Smets ຈາກອົງການ WSP.

ສຸດທ້າຍນີ້, ພວກເຮົາຂໍຂອບໃຈມາຍັງ ທ່ານ ວຽງ​ສະ​ໄໝ ວົງ​ຄຳ​ຊາວ, ຜູ້ປະສານງານອົງການ WSP ປະ​ຈຳ​ລາວ ແລະ ທ່ານ ບຸນ​ທະ​ວົງ ສຸ​ຣິ​ສັກ, ຊ່ຽວຊານດ້ານການພັດທະນາສັງຄົມອົງການ WSP.

ທີມງານວິເຄາະຕ່ອງໂສ້ການສະໜອງຂອງບໍລິສັດທີ່ປຶກສາ Emerging Markets Consulting

Executive Summary

Background


Around 42% of those in rural communities in Lao PDR practice open-defecation (OD), compared to only 4% in urban areas. However, there has been significant improvement in rural communities – 73% of rural households practiced OD as recently as 2000 (WHO-UNICEF 2014).

Lao PDR sanitation coverage estimates




Urban (%)




Rural (%)




Total (%)




1995

2012




1995

2012




1995

2012

Improved facilities

62

90




12

50




20

65

Shared facilities

3

4




0

1




1

2

Other unimproved

9

2




10

7




10

4

Open defecation

26

4




78

42




69

29

Source: WHO-UNICEF JMP 2014.


Download 6.78 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   41




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2020
send message

    Main page