Grantee Research Project Results
Final Report: Community-Oriented Design and Evaluation Process for Sustainable Infrastructure
EPA Grant Number: SU833206Title: Community-Oriented Design and Evaluation Process for Sustainable Infrastructure
Investigators: Jones, Sharon A. , Brandes, David
Institution: Lafayette College
EPA Project Officer: Page, Angela
Phase: II
Project Period: August 15, 2006 through August 14, 2007
Project Amount: $75,000
RFA: P3 Awards: A National Student Design Competition for Sustainability Focusing on People, Prosperity and the Planet - Phase 2 (2006) Recipients Lists
Research Category: P3 Challenge Area - Sustainable and Healthy Communities , Pollution Prevention/Sustainable Development , P3 Awards , Sustainable and Healthy Communities
Objective:
Our approach integrates both social and economic aspects along with environmental considerations throughout the problem-solving process to create a sustainable loop. The test case for this P3 Project was the community of La Fortuna, Honduras, a community with many needs that cannot all be met in a year-long project. The Phase I P3 Project gave EWB-LC the opportunity to test CODE-PSI (the Community-Oriented Design and Evaluation Process for Sustainable Infrastructure) in a real-world setting within the communities of La Fortuna and Tule, Honduras. In these rural communities, the technical problem was relatively simple: bring water to the people and provide a means of disposing of it properly. However, developing a design that meets the technical constraints is not sufficient. The challenge in La Fortuna-Tule was to design a system that, with the social and economic assets of the community, will remain sustainable over time without harming the environment.
Using CODE-PSI to develop water/sanitation infrastructure solutions will act as a springboard as the community strives towards sustainable development. UNICEF states that water projects can be ideal “entry point projects” because they “provide experience in the key areas of community participation” including discussion, planning, decision making, contribution of labor and local resources and taking responsibility for financial and physical maintenance.
The first objective of the Phase II grant was to complete the physical infrastructure of the La Fortuna-Tule water and sanitation project using the CODE-PSI method. The second objective was to finalize CODE-PSI using the previous Lagunitas project, the La Fortuna-Tule test results from the first research objective, and the sustainability evaluations of other rural infrastructure projects in region. Our third and final research objective was to disseminate CODE-PSI to other college campuses interested in such service-learning opportunities.
Summary/Accomplishments (Outputs/Outcomes):
We met our first objective by completing the physical infrastructure of the La Fortuna-Tule water and sanitation project using the CODE-PSI method. This physical component of the project was important in providing a real, relevant, community-scale test case for the methods that were the main focus of the grant proposal.
We met our second objective by successfully implementing the final steps of the seven-step CODE-PSI in La Fortuna and Lagunitas and implementing steps one and two in El Convento. Since the development of CODE-PSI we have revised our set of manuals to include information on hygiene, shock chlorination, and watershed protection. The main changes made were to the community assessment questionnaire where additional multiple-choice answers were added in order to provide a method for a quantitative evaluation of the community. Also, the addition of a template into which the answers will be inserted to allow for a consistent method of calculating responses was recommended.
We successfully met our third objective by developing a method for sharing information for similar project teams to have a successful and tested method of creating rural water and sanitation systems.
Conclusions:
By achieving direct technical objectives, including improved environmental quality, we will be able to improve the overall quality of life for community members. Additionally our method leads to improved community organization, education, chapter organization, and participation. We consider CODE-PSI a well-refined document open to additional improvement and critique. However, without CODE-PSI the project would not be as manageable and sustainable. After disseminating our findings, other groups have considered adopting or recommending it such as on the AIChE website.
Our objective was to use CODE-PSI to develop water/sanitation infrastructure solutions that act as a springboard as the community strives towards sustainable development. We have concluded that, given the economic assets of the community, it will be difficult to operate and maintain a water system of this capacity. One major limitation of CODE-PSI that we have determined, through previous experience with our school’s Economic Empowerment and Global Learning Project group, is its lack of economic development consideration in conjunction with the water system. We expect to see significant gains in the community’s prosperity and increased overall development from the water sytem alone. This also will contribute to their ability to help the environment. As seen in other communities and our work in Lagunitas, when economics and water projects are implemented as separate entities the total benefit is less because the water system designs do not include considerations for the economic plan and vice versa. This leads us to our conclusion that the most sustainable projects include both water development as well as economic and other development in order to provide the best result.
Our method requires community participation and buy-in; however, with our project, several members did not contribute to the system and so it did not provide for them. In the future, we would need more community organization and participation for the project to be entirely successful.
Additionally, cost and schedule overruns as well as political turmoil caused logistical difficulties that made it difficult to accomplish tasks on time. In the future, we will need to seriously consider the timing and logistics of such a remote satellite project location with only one to two site visits per year.
Supplemental Keywords:
Community-based, Developing country, Design-cycle, Education, Infrastructure, Rural Sanitation, Service-learning, Water
, RFA, Geographic Area, Sustainable Industry/Business, Sustainable Environment, Technology for Sustainable Environment, International, life cycle analysis, sustainable development, sustainable water use, environmental conscious construction, alternative infrastructure design, community based, pollution prevention, Design for EnvironmentRelevant Websites:
http://sites.lafayette.edu/ewb/ Exit
P3 Phase I:
Development of Sustainable Water Systems in Yoro, Honduras | Final ReportThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.