Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Apr;27(1):89-104.
doi: 10.1177/0956247815572746.

Container-based sanitation: assessing costs and effectiveness of excreta management in Cap Haitien, Haiti

Affiliations

Container-based sanitation: assessing costs and effectiveness of excreta management in Cap Haitien, Haiti

Sebastien Tilmans et al. Environ Urban. 2015 Apr.

Abstract

Container-based sanitation (CBS) - in which wastes are captured in sealable containers that are then transported to treatment facilities - is an alternative sanitation option in urban areas where on-site sanitation and sewerage are infeasible. This paper presents the results of a pilot household CBS service in Cap Haitien, Haiti. We quantify the excreta generated weekly in a dense urban slum,(1) the proportion safely removed via container-based public and household toilets, and the costs associated with these systems. The CBS service yielded an approximately 3.5-fold decrease in the unmanaged share of faeces produced, and nearly eliminated the reported use of open defecation and "flying toilets" among service recipients. The costs of this pilot small-scale service were higher than those of large-scale waterborne sewerage, but economies of scale have the potential to reduce CBS costs over time. The paper concludes with a discussion of planning and policy implications of incorporating CBS into the menu of sanitation options for rapidly growing cities.

Keywords: container-based sanitation; faecal management; urban sanitation; waste infrastructure; waterless sanitation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Reported facilities used by adults to defecate by day and by night NOTE: DK = “Don’t know”; NR = “No response”
Figure 2
Figure 2
Share of faeces captured by sanitation practice, cohort and study phase
None

References

    1. Adubofour K, Obiri-Danso K, Quansah C. (2013), “Sanitation survey of two urban slum Muslim communities in the Kumasi metropolis, Ghana”, Environment and Urbanization Vol 25, No 1, pages 189–207.
    1. Cairncross S. (1992), “Sanitation and water supply: practical lessons from the decade”, World Bank Water and Sanitation Discussion Paper Series Vol 9.
    1. Davis J. (2004), “Corruption in public service delivery: experience from South Asia’s water and sanitation sector”, World Development Vol 32, No 1, pages 53–71.
    1. Department of Water and Sanitation in Developing Countries/Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (Sandec/Eawag) (2006), “Urban Excreta Management - Situation, Challenges, and Promising Solutions”, 15 pages.
    1. Günther I, Niwagaba C, Lüthi C, Horst A, Mosler H-J, Tumbewaze I. (2012), “When is shared sanitation improved sanitation? - The correlation between number of users and toilet hygiene”, Urban Affordable Clean Toilets (U-ACT), 5 pages.

LinkOut - more resources