Assessing The Economic Cost of Public Water Supply Inequality Among Households in Makurdi, Nigeria

References

[14] . The water distribution network in Makurdi is not fully comprehensive, leading to some areas experiencing low pressure or no access to treated water. Residents in these areas often rely on alternative sources like private boreholes, hand-dug wells or even purchasing water from private vendors. Figure 1 shows the built-up areas of Makurdi town. Fig 1: Makurdi LGA showing Council wards and contiguous built-up areas. Source: Benue State Ministry of Lands and Survey 3.2 Method of sampling A total of 399 questionnaires were administered through the assistance of enumerators. The systematic sampling method was use to distribute questionnaires to the selected sample size. The first house at the entrance of each neighborhood were selected systematically at interval of five houses in the study area. Household members from 18 years and above, knowledgeable about water supply and the economic cost of water supply were given questionnaires to answer. 3.3 Method of data collected and Analysis To estimate the economic cost of not having access to public water supply in Makurdi town, the study made use of primary data sources. Data on capital cost (purchase of storage facilities, construction of private well and boreholes, amount invested in bike, wheelbarrow to ease the burden of collecting water) were collected. Similarly, financial cost (cost of buying water, water treatment cost, amount spent on hospital bill as a result of health hazard from contaminated water sources, cost of fueling bike and power to provide water for households) were also collected. These were analysed using Morenikeji modeling for calculating cost of land. The modeling was adopted and modified to calculate cost of alternative water supply. Modeling for private water supply cost in Makurdi metropolis Yt =X1+(X2 ×X3) +X4+X5+X6+(X7 ×X8) +X9+X10+(X11×X12) +X13+X14+(X15 ×X16) +X17 Yt =Total cost of water supply X1 = Official cost of drilling borehole or digging a wall X2 = Number of times you use energy power to provide or pump water X3 = Cost per pump of water X4 = Other cost incurred for supply of water X5 = Cost of material needed for storage of water X6 = Official fee paid for transporting water X7 = Number of times water is transported X8 = Cost per transport X9 = Other cost incurred for providing water X10 = Official fee paid for treatment of water borne diseases X11 = Number of times victim visit hospital for catch up X12 = Cost per visit to hospital for checkup X13 = Other cost incurred as a result of treating water borne diseases X14 = Official cost of buying water X15 = Number of times water is bought X16 = Cost per Purchase X17 = Other cost incurred due to water purchase. IV. RESULTS 4.1 socio-economic characteristics of respondents Though not central to this study, data on the socio- economic characteristic of respondents helped to place the findings in context, knowing that the impact and ability to cope with economic cost of public water supply inequality depends on socio-economic status of the residents, like gender, occupation and income were collected and analysed, and the data is presented in table 1 Table 1: socio-economic characteristics of respondents Variables Categories Frequency Percentage Gender Male Female 261 138 65.4% 34.6% Occupation Net employed Employed in the formal sector Employed in the informal sector 93 146 160 23.3% 36.6% 40.1% Income 120,000-500,000 per annul 501,000-1,000,000 per annul 1,001,000-5,000,000 5,001,000 and above 150 139 97 13 37.6% 34.8% 24.3% 3.3% Source: Authors field work 2024 Occupation: The occupation status of household’s respondent shows that, 23% of respondents are not employed, 36.6% are employed in the formal sector, and 40.1% of respondent are employed in the informal sector. This implies that a greater percentage of household respondent have no sustainable livelihood and an additional burden of providing water for themselves will affects their economic well-being. Income level: On income of household, the result shows that, 37.6% of respondents have an annual income of 120,000-500,000 per annul, 34.8% respondents have an annual income of 501,000- 1,000,000 per annul, 24.3% respondents have an annual income of 1,001,000-5,000,000 per annul and 3.3% of household’s respondents have an annual income of 5,000,000 and above. This suggest that the majority of the respondent are poor and their income is too small to have additional burden of providing water for themselves as this will affect their economic well-being. 4.2 Economic cost of Public Water Supply Inequality Data for the economic cost of public water supply inequality is hereby presented in table 2. The data on the economic cost of public water supply inequality by the affected households’ respondents revealed that, a total of ₦ 235,727,300 is spend by household to access water supply as a result of unreliable public water supply in Makurdi town. A detail breakdown of the economic cost (capital and financial cost) is discussed below. Table 2 Estimated economic cost of household’s alternative water supply in Makurdi Neighborhood Cost of drilling borehole Cost of digging well Cost of pumping water & maintainers (borehole) (year) Cost of transport (year) Cost of storage containers Cost of treatment for water borne disease Cost of buying water (year) Total cost of household’s water supply Wadata 16,500,000 4,950,000 7,560,000 3,000,000 1,860,000 1,432,800 19,123, 200 54,426,000 Achusa 3,300,000 450,000 480,000 259,200 150,000 127,500 1,329,600 6,096,300 Nyon Layout 6,600,000 1,050,000 1,560,000 864,000 970,000 308,600 2,212 900 13,565,500 Old GRA 1,100,000 - 240,000 129,600 270,000 93,000 648,000 2,480,600 New GRA 2,200,000 - 960,000 90,000 450,000 110,400 1,353,600 5,164,000 Owners Occupier 1,100,000 150,000 - 64,800 250,000 41,000 249,600 1,855,400 Judges quarters 1,100,000 150,000 360,000 67,200 500,000 40,000 432,000 2,649,200 Gyado Villa 150,000 120,000 - 20,000 23,000 249, 800 562,800 Wurukum 2,200,000 1,950,000 960,000 648,000 660,000 388,800 2,745,600 9,552,400 Nyiman Layout 1,100,000 600,000 - 259,200 300,000 109,200 1,113,600 3,482,000 Tse-Adi 1,100,000 300,000 240,000 312,000 240,000 86,000 532,800 2,810,800 Gaadi 7,700,000 900,000 3,600,000 750,000 1,680,000 336,600 3,921,600 18,888,200 BIPC Quarters - - - 129,600 20,000 17,000 864,000 1,030,600 Benue State University - - - 64,800 1,310,000 876,000 5,558,400 7,809,200 Logo II 1,100,000 1,050,000 240,000 388,800 530,000 197,400 2,160,000 5,666,200 Logo I 6,600,000 2,400,000 1,560,000 240,000 470,000 371,400 2,678,400 14,319,800 Airforce Base 1,100,000 - 180,000 90,000 850,000 284,800 16,800 2,521,600 Welfare Quarters 3,300,000 1,350,000 840,000 300,000 550,000 232,100 428,400 7,000,500 Yaikyor 7,700,000 1,650,000 1,920,000 504,000 480,000 301,700 2,212,800 14,768,500 NorthBank 12,100,000 3,900,000 8,280,000 3,240,000 1,540,000 1,112,200 7,562,400 37,734,600 High Level 7,700,000 900,000 3,240,000 1,166,400 1,500,000 528,000 6,614,400 21,648,800 Federal Housing 1,100,000 - - 64,800 80,000 17,500 432,000 1,694,300 NASME - - - 133,000 210,000 37,000 267,000 647,000 Total 84,700,000 21,900,000 32,340,000 12,632,400 13,294,000 7,035,000 62,051,100 ₦235,727,300 Source: Authors field work 2024 4.2.1 Capital cost of Alternative water supply Table 2 shows that the capital cost on water assets that will benefit households for more than a year; such as construction of borehole, hand dug well, and storage facilities used for collecting water, were estimated to cost the affected households about ₦119,894,000. A breakdown of the capital cost shows that ₦84,700,000 was used for motorize boreholes, ₦21,900,000 was used for hand dug well, and ₦13,294,000 was used by the affected households to purchase water storage facilities like overhead tanks and other smaller water storage containers like buckets. The findings revealed that households in the study area spent huge amount of money acquiring water assets as a result of unequal and unreliable public water supply. This suggest that, household’s dependence on alternative sources of water supply add heavy financial burden to affected households. This finding agrees with the findings of (Babuna et al 2023). 4.2.2 Financial cost of alternative water supply Data in table 2 shows that, the day to day running cost of alternative water supply by affected households in the study area was estimated to a total amount of ₦ 114,058,500 as the running cost incurred by the affected households’ respondents. A breakdown of the day to day running cost shows that, maintainers of borehole, payment of electricity bills, and purchase of fuel used in powering the borehole is ₦ 44,972,400 in a year. Financial cost incurred for treatment of water borne diseases as a result of unreliable public water supply was estimated to cost households ₦ 7,035,000. And ₦ 62,051,100 is the financial cost incurred by households in buying water in a year. As shown in table 2, buying water from water vendor is the variable with the highest financial cost used in day to day running of household water supply. Households in the study area spent huge amount of money buying water from water vendors. A tank of water cost ₦25,000, while 20 liters’ container of water cost between ₦50 to ₦100 and even ₦200 in some neighborhoods, depending on the location and distance from water source. Many households buy water for drinking purpose and other households uses. Even households with public water supply and boreholes still buy bottle water or sachet water popularly known as pure water for drinking purposes, because they don’t trust these sources of water supply for drinking purpose. This have placed a heavy financial burden on households affected by public water supply inequality. This suggest that households spend an average of ₦ 874 per capita every day to access water for households needs and ₦26,220 every month to access water. This amount is 37% of a household on a minimum wage of 70,000 which is above the stipulated 4% - 15% stipulated by the Ministry of Water Resources. This implies that, the provision of water by individual households is not sustainable and a threat to economic well-being of households in the study area. V. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The study concluded that, public water supply inequality affects the economic well-being of households in Makurdi town and it is a threat to poverty reduction, sustainable urban growth and development. The study recommended infrastructure investment, and a decentralized public water supply approach that is backed by a definite policy to enhance service delivery and minimize economic stress in Makurdi town. REFERENCING

[1] Babuna, P., Yang, X., Tulcan, R.X., Dehui, B., Takase, M., and Guba, B.Y, (2023). Modeling water inequality and water security: The role of water governance. Journal of Environmental Management. Volume 326, Part B Jan. 2023.

[2] Cherunya (2015). Sustainable supply of safe drinking water for underserved households in Kenya: investigating the viability of decentralized solution. Water 7, 5437 -5457. https://

[3] Chitonge H., (2020). Water scarcity for most people in Africa is socially induced. Center for Africa Studies, University of Cape town, Cape town.

[4] Francisco N., Samiria M.O., Francis A., Tais M.N., and Tereza M.X.(2022). Diversification of urban water supply: An assessment of social cost and water production cost. Hydro politics Association. https://

[5] Jideonwo J.A (2014). Ensuring sustainable water supply in Lagos, Nigeria. M.Sc thesis, University of Pennsylvania Penn Library, Philadelphia, 161.p.

[6] Jordan J., and Wyatt A., (1989). Estimating operations and maintenance cost for water supply systems in developing countries. WASH TECHNICAL REPORT No 48 January 1989. Water sanitation for health project.

[7] Kujinga, K., Vanderpost, C., Mmopelwa G., and Wolski P. (2014). An analysis of factors contributing to household water security problems and threats in different settlement categories of Ngamiland, Botswana. Journal of physical and chemistry of the earth. Vol. 67 – 69.

[8] Lebeka, K., Twomey, M., and Krurger, T., (2021). Municipal failure, unequal access and conflicts over water: a hydrological perspective on water insecurity of rural households in Kwazulu- Natal South Africa. Water Alternatives 14(1) 272 -280.

[9] Maurya, V.N., Misra, R.B, Anderson P.K, and Vashist S., (2016). A case study on water supply access and demand using descriptive statistical methods. American Journal of Biological and Environmental Statistics.

[10] Ochungo E.A., Ouma G.O., Obiero J.P.O., and Odero N.A., (2019). The implication of unreliable urban water supply services: The case of vendor water cost in Langata sub country, Nairobi City, Kenya. Journal of Water Resources and Protection Vol. 11 No 7 July 2019.

[11] Ohwo, O, and Abotutu A., (2014). Access to potable water supply in Nigerian Cities Evidence from Yenagoa Metropolis. American Journal of Water Resources. 2(2): 31-36

[12] Rudi., R., Massuda., A., Paula., S. Lago., M., Atun. R. Nunes. L. and Castro M.C (2021). Effect of socioeconomic inequalities and Vulnerabilities on health system preparedness and response to covid 19 in Brazil: a comprehensive analysis. The LANCET GLOBAL HEALTH. Vol.9 issue 6, June 1st 2021

[13] Smiley S.L., (2017). Defining and Measuring water access: lessons from Tanzania for moving forward in Post- Millennium Development Goal Era. African Geographical Review. 36(2): 168-182.

[14] Tyonum, E.T., (2024). Evaluation of performance of the Greater Makurdi, Water works in Benue State. International Journal of Advanced Academic Research, volume 10 issues 6 (June, 2024) www.ijaar.org

[15] Wadwekar M., and Kapshe M., (2023). Assessing spatial variation in water supply of a city using dasymetric mapping. Journal of Hydroinformatics vol. 25 No 4 1295: 10.2166/hydro.2023.

[16] WHO/UNICEF JMP (2021). Progress on household drinking water, sanitation and hygiene, 2000 – 2020. Five years into the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). New York, NY: WHO/UNICEF JMP.

@article{1711534,
      author = {Saakuma Ortserga, Felix K. Kwaghsende, Timothy T. Gyuse},
      title = {Assessing The Economic Cost of Public Water Supply Inequality Among Households in Makurdi, Nigeria},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2025},
      volume = {9},
      number = {4},
      pages = {1459-1466},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1711534.pdf},
      abstract = {The challenge of access to safe and reliable public water supply by residents remains daunting in many Nigerian towns and cities due to population growth. A reduction in public water supply inequality contribute to health and economic well-being of urban residents. This study investigated the economic cost of public water supply inequality among households in Makurdi town, Nigeria with focus on how inequality of access to public water supply influences households? expenditure and economic well-being of residents. The objective of the study is; to estimate the economic implications of not having access to public water supply, and recommend ways that can ameliorate the inequality and lead to safe and reliable public water supply for all residents. The study stratified Makurdi town into 23 neighborhoods, while the systematic sampling technique was used to select 399 household respondents across the neighborhoods. Structured questionnaire, and interview were used to collect data for the study. The Morenikeji modeling for calculating cost of land was adopted and modified to calculate the economic cost of alternative water supply in Makurdi town. Findings of the study revealed that majority of households respondents (67%) are poor, and households spent 37% of their monthly income accessing alternative water sources. This amount is high, unsustainable and above the stipulated 4%-15% charged by water utility service providers. The study concluded that, public water supply inequality affects the economic well-being of households in Makurdi town and it is a threat to poverty reduction, sustainable urban growth and development. The study recommended improved public water infrastructure investment, and a decentralized public water supply approach that is backed by a definite policy to enhance service delivery and minimize economic stress.},
      keywords = {Economic Cost, Public Water Supply, Water Supply Inequality, Household Expenditure, Makurdi, Nigeria And Urban Water Access},
      month = {October},
  }