Cost-effective boreholes in sub-Saharan Africa

Abstract

A common assertion is that the cost of water well drilling in sub-Saharan Africa is too high and that construction quality is regularly compromised. Over the last 20 years, several studies regarding this have been undertaken, covering more than ten countries in the region. Although drilling costs in sub-Saharan Africa are generally higher than in India, there are valid reasons for this. However, changes to borehole designs, procurement and contract management practices, well clustering for economies of scale, siting and supervision practices as well as support to and professionalization of the private sector can all serve to bring drilling costs down, and improve construction quality. This paper provides an overview of how drilling costs can be calculated. It pulls together the key issues that affect drilling costs and prices into a conceptual framework. The framework is subsequently used to compare policies and practices for the countries where information is readily available. The paper thus intends to raise awareness and improve the analytical capacity of implementers and decision-makers regarding measures that could be adopted to improve the cost-effectiveness of borehole drilling in their particular context.

Cost-benefit analysis of water source improvements through borehole drilling or rehabilitation: an empirical study based on a cluster randomized controlled trial in the Volta Region, Ghana

“…The initial investment cost was US$ 10,487 for drilling one borehole and US$ 2,823 for rehabilitating one nonfunctioning borehole (model: Indian Mark II or Afridev). The investment cost for drilling a borehole seems to be reasonable based on similar projects undertaken in sub-Saharan countries [33]. The higher benefit-cost ratios might be attributed in part to the larger number of beneficiaries.…”

Public Water Supply and Sanitation Authorities for Strategic Sustainable Domestic Water Management. A Case of Iringa Region In Tanzania

“…Using such an estimation for the period of 1999 to 2018, at least 26,406 boreholes are available in Tanzania. In fact, as of 2009, private enterprises contributed about 9000 boreholes from Dar es Salaam city alone [92]. Since boreholes are drilled to operate for 20 years to 50 years [93], then a total of 4,174,060 m 3 /d is obtainable and capable of satisfying more than 60% of current freshwater demands for all Tanzanians.…”

Characterizing Data Ecosystems to Support Official Statistics with Open Mapping Data for Reporting on Sustainable Development Goals

“…Moreover, spending on WASH per capita is about twenty times higher for urban than for rural areas, allocations of budgets to districts is minimal and funding tends to go to constructing new water points instead of to ongoing operation and maintenance, especially for project-driven NGO interventions [41]. This has led to insufficient capacity development and about 30% of the water point infrastructure that is not functioning well [49]. Overall, we can conclude that financing is inadequate in terms of both quantity and quality (targeting areas and citizens in an equitable way) [41].…”

“…The average lifespan of a water point depends on many factors, such as for instance type, water source and maintenance. Estimations for how long boreholes on average remain functional vary between 10 years [49] and 20 to 50 years [55]. However, within the lifespan, the functionality of water points can change quite fast.…”

“…However, within the lifespan, the functionality of water points can change quite fast. [49] state that 30% of installed water point facilities in Malawi is not functional. This is supported by numbers from the largest data providers: 33.5% of water points is not working according to the DoIWD, 40.2% according to data from the Madzi Alipo database and 21.6% according to the WPDx.…”