Received: 03 May 2012 – Accepted for review: 21 May 2012 – Discussion started: 29 Jan 2013
Abstract. Preventive measures yield much higher cost effective benefits as compared to remedial measures. To verify this hypothesis, a survey was conducted in two different regions of Rawalpindi district of Pakistan by comparing the cost on medication and mitigation expenditures for reduction in the burden of water borne diseases. Water Quality monitoring of the study areas in comparison to WHO Drinking Water Guidelines revealed the satisfactory level of physico-chemical parameters, however; significant bacteriological contamination was found at 86% of the monitored sites in Gujar Khan and 87% in Murree region. A field questionnaire was used to estimate the expenditures on disinfection and sanitation and concluded that 8.09% of total income of each family were spent by the inhabitants of the study area on medication for water borne diseases. Correlation was worked out between the rate of water related diseases (VWRD), unsafe drinking water (CDW), poor sanitation (PS), unhealthy personal hygiene and environment (UHPHE). A simulation model "Victim's Rate Calculator" was developed to forecast the estimated number of victims within a population. Findings of the study verified the hypothesis that preventive measures are better choice than remedial measures due to cost benefit ratio (1 : 1.6) with a clear advantage of 60%.
How to cite. Tahir, M. A. and Rasheed, H.: Cost and impact analysis of preventive and remedial measures for safe drinking water, Drink. Water Eng. Sci. Discuss., 6, 1–26, https://doi.org/10.5194/dwesd-6-1-2013, 2013.