Comparing Sanitation Systems Using Sustainability Criteria

This report demonstrates a criteria-based approach to comparing sanitation systems for municipal planning across three contexts: Sweden, South Africa, and Mexico. It finds that while centralized waterborne systems are often the social norm, they frequently suffer from financial and operational unsustainability. Conversely, dry urine-diversion systems consistently show superior environmental performance and resource conservation, despite lower socio-cultural acceptance and higher household-level management requirements.

• The report defines a sustainable sanitation system and its services as those that "protect and promote human health, do not contribute to environmental degradation or depletion of the resource base, and are technically and institutionally appropriate, economically viable and socially acceptable."
• Across all three illustrative contexts (Sweden, South Africa, and Mexico), dry urine-diversion systems consistently outperformed conventional centralized wastewater treatment plants (the '0 alternative') in environmental categories, specifically regarding lower discharges of nitrogen (N) and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), higher quality of recycled products, and lower water consumption.
• Dry urine-diversion systems generally scored lower than centralized waterborne systems in terms of socio-cultural appropriateness and convenience because flushing toilets are the established norm and these systems require more active handling of excreta by the user.
• In the South African case (Buffalo City), the centralized waterborne system is considered unsustainable due to a lack of funding for maintenance, resulting in an estimated ZAR 518 million (USD 86 million) requirement to bring the existing system up to standard.
• In the Mexican case (Tepoztlán), approximately 90 per cent of municipal wastewater treatment plants are abandoned due to factors including inappropriate technology choice, lack of maintenance, and insupportable operational costs.
• The report argues that full cost recovery is essential for the financial sustainability of sanitation services, noting that this is not achieved in the South African or Mexican examples where the municipality heavily subsidizes centralized systems while households bear the full cost of on-site alternatives.
• The Swedish case study in Sandviken highlights that on-site treatment systems can achieve nutrient and organic matter reductions equal to or higher than conventional tertiary wastewater treatment plants.

APA

Lennartsson, M., Kvarnström, E., Lundberg, T., Buenfil, J., & Sawyer, R. (2009). Comparing Sanitation Systems Using Sustainability Criteria. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Air-land-water-resources/comparing-sanitation-systemsweb.pdf

Chicago

Lennartsson, Maria, Elisabeth Kvarnström, Tommy Lundberg, Jacinto Buenfil, and Ron Sawyer. Comparing Sanitation Systems Using Sustainability Criteria. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2009. https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Air-land-water-resources/comparing-sanitation-systemsweb.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Lennartsson |first1=Maria |last2=Kvarnström |first2=Elisabeth |last3=Lundberg |first3=Tommy |last4=Buenfil |first4=Jacinto |last5=Sawyer |first5=Ron |title=Comparing Sanitation Systems Using Sustainability Criteria |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=2009 |url=https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Air-land-water-resources/comparing-sanitation-systemsweb.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{lennartsson2009comparing, author = {Lennartsson, Maria and Kvarnström, Elisabeth and Lundberg, Tommy and Buenfil, Jacinto and Sawyer, Ron}, title = {{Comparing Sanitation Systems Using Sustainability Criteria}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2009}, url = {https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Air-land-water-resources/comparing-sanitation-systemsweb.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }