Cotruvo J A, Trevant C
NSF International, Washington, D.C., USA.
Schriftenr Ver Wasser Boden Lufthyg. 2000;108:93-123.
At the fundamental level, there are remarkable parallels between developed and less developed countries in problems of providing safe drinking water in rural areas, but of course, they differ greatly in degree and in the opportunities for resolution. Small water supplies frequently encounter difficulty accessing sufficient quantities of drinking water for all domestic uses. If the water must be treated for safety reasons, then treatment facilities and trained operating personnel and finances are always in short supply. Ideally, each solution should be sustainable within its own cultural, political and economic context, and preferably with local personnel and financial resources. Otherwise, the water supply will be continuously dependent on outside resources and thus will not be able to control its destiny, and its future will be questionable. The history of success in this regard has been inconsistent, particularly in less developed but also in some developed countries. The traditional and ideal solution in developing countries has been central water treatment and a piped distribution network, however, results have had a mixed history primarily due to high initial costs and operation and maintenance, inadequate access to training, management and finance sufficient to support a fairly complex system for the long term. These complete systems are also slow to be implemented so waterborne disease continues in the interim. Thus, non-traditional, creative, cost-effective practical solutions that can be more rapidly implemented are needed. Some of these options could involve: small package central treatment coupled with non piped distribution, e.g. community supplied bottled water; decentralized treatment for the home using basic filtration and/or disinfection; higher levels of technology to deal with chemical contaminants e.g. natural fluoride or arsenic. These technological options coupled with training, technical support and other essential elements like community commitment provide opportunities that should be explored both for rural small communities and in rapidly growing periurban areas in developing countries.
从根本层面来看，发达国家和欠发达国家在农村地区提供安全饮用水的问题上存在显著的相似之处，但当然，它们在程度和解决问题的机会方面有很大差异。小型供水系统常常难以获取足够数量的饮用水以满足所有家庭用途。如果出于安全原因必须对水进行处理，那么处理设施、训练有素的操作人员和资金总是短缺。理想情况下，每个解决方案都应在其自身的文化、政治和经济背景下具有可持续性，最好利用当地人员和财政资源。否则，供水将持续依赖外部资源，从而无法掌控自身命运，其未来也将充满疑问。在这方面的成功历史并不一致，特别是在欠发达国家，在一些发达国家也是如此。发展中国家传统且理想的解决方案一直是集中式水处理和管道分配网络，然而，其结果好坏参半，主要原因是初始成本高、运营和维护成本高、缺乏足够的培训机会、管理和资金不足以长期支持一个相当复杂的系统。这些完整系统的实施也很缓慢，因此在此期间水传播疾病仍在继续。因此，需要能够更快实施的非传统、有创意、具有成本效益的实际解决方案。其中一些选择可能包括：小型集中处理与非管道分配相结合，例如社区供应瓶装水；利用基本过滤和/或消毒在家中进行分散式处理；采用更高水平的技术来处理化学污染物，例如天然氟化物或砷。这些技术选择，再加上培训、技术支持以及社区承诺等其他关键要素，为发展中国家的农村小社区和快速发展的城郊地区提供了应该探索的机会。
