2013年-世界发展银行全球_Socialist_Republic_of_Vietnam___Performance_of_the_Wastewater_Sector_in_Urban_Areas_A_Review_and_Recommendations_for_Improvement_158页_4mb

Summary of the Vietnam Urban Wastewater Review (Report No: ACS7712)

Core Content

This report provides a comprehensive review of the performance of the wastewater sector in urban areas of Vietnam and offers recommendations for improvement. It is part of the East Asian Urban Sanitation Review and focuses on the challenges and opportunities in scaling up urban sanitation services to meet the growing needs of the urban population.

Main Findings on Sector Performance

• Government Initiatives: Since 1998, the Vietnamese government has made significant efforts in developing urban sanitation policies, legislations, and investing in wastewater treatment systems.
• Access and Coverage:
  • Open defecation has been eliminated.
  • 94% of the population has access to toilets.
  • 90% of households use septic tanks for on-site treatment.
  • 60% of households connect to public sewerage systems, primarily combined systems.
• Infrastructure Development:
  • By 2012, 17 urban wastewater systems were constructed in major cities, with a total capacity of 530,000 cubic meters per day.
  • 32 new systems are currently in the design or construction phase.
• Investment Trends:
  • Annual sanitation sector investment was USD 150 million or USD 2.1 billion between 1995-2009.
  • This represents 0.45% of GDP annually.
• Current Challenges:
  • Only 10% of wastewater is treated, with most being discharged informally into drainage systems.
  • Only 4% of septage is treated, with poor fecal sludge management in most cities.
  • Limited investment in collection systems alongside treatment facilities.
  • Low cost recovery due to inadequate tariffs and lack of O&M funding.
  • Institutional constraints that limit the autonomy of wastewater enterprises.
  • High financing needs, estimated at USD 8.3 billion to meet the sanitation needs of 36 million people by 2025.
  • Annual economic losses from poor sanitation are estimated at USD 780 million or 1.3% of GDP.

Sector Performance Analysis

• Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM): Although IWRM and River Basin Management principles are mentioned in legal documents, they are not yet implemented in practice.
• Institutional Arrangements: Most urban wastewater enterprises operate under annual work orders from local authorities and receive fixed budgets, which hinders investment in R&D and system optimization.
• Effluent Standards: Effluent standards have evolved since 1995, with six revisions between 2000 and 2011. These changes have caused uncertainty among local authorities. The current standards require high-level treatment, which limits the use of simpler and more affordable technologies.
• Technology Selection: Despite low influent BOD concentrations, many treatment plants use conventional activated sludge technology. This is costly and inefficient. Lower cost technologies like stabilization ponds, trickling filters, and constructed wetlands could be more suitable but are not widely adopted.
• Household Connections: Connections to public sewerage systems are not mandatory in combined systems, leading to low influent organic loading at treatment plants. In separate systems, all households must be connected, leading to higher influent concentrations.
• Septage Management: There is no effective septage management in Vietnam, with only one city (Hai Phong) practicing scheduled emptying. Septage is often managed by private service providers with poor oversight.
• Funding Sources: Investment in urban sanitation has been primarily supported by Official Development Assistance (ODA). However, the efficiency of this investment is yet to be established, as it has focused on treatment facilities rather than collection systems.

Key Messages and Recommendations

For National Policy Makers

• National Strategy: Establish a national strategy based on integrated water resource management and a river basin approach to elevate urban sanitation on the political agenda.
• Financing Policies: Develop appropriate financing policies and mechanisms for both investment and O&M, including grant finance, government bonds, tariff measures, and PPP arrangements.
• Utility Reform: Encourage the establishment of corporate utilities or private sector organizations to deliver integrated services.
• Public-Private Partnerships (PPP): Promote PPP and Private Sector Participation (PSP) by improving the business environment and integrating water and wastewater services.
• Effluent Standards: Allow some flexibility in effluent discharge quality based on receiving waters. Start with lower or no nutrient limits for non-sensitive waters and gradually introduce more stringent standards.

For Local Governments and Sanitation Service Providers

• Strategic Planning: Adopt a strategic sanitation planning approach at the city level that considers social, technical, institutional, and economic factors.
• Institutional and Regulatory Arrangements: Promote efficient institutional and regulatory arrangements, including management contracts for O&M and establishing a regulatory body with authority over unit prices and tariffs.
• System Design: Choose between centralized and decentralized systems based on local conditions. Ensure that infrastructure aligns with the city's Master Plan.
• Community Involvement: Consider the community as the first level of demand expression and develop appropriate infrastructure at that level.
• Public Awareness: Enhance public awareness and behavior change to improve understanding of the benefits of well-designed and operated wastewater systems, thereby increasing willingness to pay and participation in the system.

Key Information

• Funding Needs: Estimated at USD 8.3 billion to provide sewerage to 36 million urban people by 2025.
• Economic Losses: USD 780 million annually due to poor sanitation.
• Technologies: Conventional activated sludge technology is widely used, but lower cost alternatives like stabilization ponds, trickling filters, and constructed wetlands are not prioritized.
• Household Connections: Not mandatory in combined systems, leading to lower influent organic loading.
• Septage Management: Poorly managed, with only one city (Hai Phong) practicing scheduled emptying.
• Cost Recovery: Low due to inadequate tariffs and limited O&M funding.

Conclusion

The Vietnamese urban wastewater sector has made notable progress but still faces significant challenges in terms of treatment efficiency, cost recovery, and institutional autonomy. A strategic, integrated approach involving both national and local actors is essential for sustainable development and improved performance. The report emphasizes the need for flexible effluent standards, better financing mechanisms, and increased private sector participation to support the expansion and efficiency of the sector.