Project Full-Sena - Final Work.

UNIVERSITY OF ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCE
CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
“ASSESSMENT OF WATER SERVICE LEVELS IN FIAPRE SUNYANI

WEST MUNICIPAL. ”
BY
SUFYAN ABDUL-LATIF SENA
&
YAKUBU RAZAK
OCTOBER, 2022
“ASSESSMENT OF WATER SERVICE LEVELS IN FIAPRE SUNYANI
WEST MUNICIPAL. ”
BY
SUFYAN ABDUL-LATIF SENA
&
YAKUBU RAZAK
A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Award of
BsC. Civil Engineering in School of Engineering
University of Energy and Natural Resources
Sunyani, Ghana.
October 2022
Approved: Department of Civil Enginerring
Ing. Dr. Prince Antwi-Agyei …………………… ………………….
(Supervisor) Signature Date
Ing. Dr. Prince Antwi-Agyei …………………… ………………….
(Head of Department) Signature Date
i
© Year
Copyright
University of Energy and Natural Resources
All rights reserved
ii
DECLARATION
We hereby declare that this work is our own towards the Bachelor of Science degree in (Civil
Engineering) and that to the best of our knowledge, it contains no material previously published
by another person nor material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree of
the University, except where due acknowledgement has been made in the text. We also
understand that the copyright in our thesis is transferred to the Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, UENR, Sunyani.
SUFYAN ABDUL-LATIF SENA ……………………… 20/10/2022

……………………..
(UEB0705318) Signature Date
YAKUBU RAZAK ………………………. 20/10/2022

…………………….
(UEB0705918) Signature Date
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Our sincere gratitude goes to the Almighty God for His guidance and presence throughout our
academic life. God has been good to our and has supplied all my needs during this research.
We also wish to express our heartfelt gratitude and appreciation to our supervisor Ing. Dr.
Prince Antwi-Agyei, we are so grateful for your immense help. You have consistently guided
us with constructive criticisms and meaningful suggestions to help us enrich our work while
making it very concise.
We also thank our course mates and each and every one who has made our stay on campus a
success.
A very big gratitude goes to the Sena Wala Family, my father, Alhaji Salifu Sena, my mother,
Hajia Fatima Sufyan. You have always urged me on and challenged me to achieve great heights
in academia. I also wish to express my appreciation to the Naeem’s Family for all the assistance
they have provided to me. To all my siblings, friends and most especially Miss Nadia Issa, I
say thank you all for your support throughout the duration of my research work.
iv
ABSTRACT
The WASH sector has many varied, diverse and complex concepts. Water service levels is
however one of the easily understood concepts due to the simplicity shrouding it. Generally,
water service levels are used to provide information on the performance of a town, community
or country. These are represented primarily by the affordability, availability, reliability and
accessibility of all facilities involved in the delivery of water services. Following up on the
introduction of the SDGs in 2015, several countries around the world are racing against the
clock to complete all targets set. Ghana is no exception, and with an estimated 76% of
households at risk of drinking water contaminated with fecal matter (UNICEF, 2019), more
effort has to be put in by all stakeholders to analyze and understand the current situation of
water service levels within the country.
Therefore, the aim of this study is to provide evidence on the current situation within Fiapre,
Sunyani West municipality. The study seeks to find relevant data involved in water service
levels from the perspective of the user and laboratory work to analyze the water quality
parameters. These were obtained by employing the use of a well-structured questionnaire and
collection of water from various water sources in the community. The findings of this research
showed that, majority of households relied on boreholes for water to carry out household
activities, the accessibility, availability and reliability of water services recorded satisfactory
results. The affordability of water services was also found to be highly regarded with 88.3%
(n=106) of households stating they found the prices of water to be affordable. We recommend
that public utilities service providers like GWCL also need to do more to improve their
coverage within Fiapre community. More work however needs to be done to educate
households within the Fiapre community on the benefits of household treatment of water. This
is especially of utmost importance when the water is to be ingested
v
Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ........................................................................................................ iv
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. v
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... ix
List of Figures ........................................................................................................................... x
CHAPTER 1 ............................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Problem Statement ........................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Research Question ............................................................................................................ 3
1.4 Aims and Objectives ........................................................................................................ 3
1.5 Justification ...................................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER 2 ............................................................................................................................. 5
LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................... 5
2.1 Water as a Resource ......................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Uses of Water ................................................................................................................... 5
2.3 Sources of Water .............................................................................................................. 6
2.4 Quality of Water ............................................................................................................... 9
2.5 Water Quality Parameters .............................................................................................. 10
2.5.1 Physical Parameters ................................................................................................. 10
2.5.2 Chemical Parameters ............................................................................................... 12
2.5.3 Microbial Parameters ............................................................................................... 13
2.6 Water Quality Parameters Analysis ............................................................................... 14
2.6.1 Temperature Analysis .............................................................................................. 14
2.6.2 pH Analysis ............................................................................................................. 14
2.6.3 Electrical Conductivity Analysis ............................................................................. 14
2.6.4 Turbidity Analysis ................................................................................................... 14
2.6.5 Coliforms Analysis .................................................................................................. 14
2.7 Parameters and their Ghana Standards by GWCL. ........................................................ 15
2.8 Accessibility to Water .................................................................................................... 15
2.9 Availability of Water ...................................................................................................... 17
2.10 Climate Change ............................................................................................................ 18
2.11 Illegal Mining ............................................................................................................... 19
vi
2.12 Seasons of the Year ...................................................................................................... 20
2.13 Reliability of Water Sources ........................................................................................ 21
2.14 Quantity of Water ......................................................................................................... 21
2.15 Affordability of Water .................................................................................................. 22
CHAPTER 3 ........................................................................................................................... 23
METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................ 23
3.1 Description of Study Area .............................................................................................. 23
3.2 Data Collection. .............................................................................................................. 24
3.3 Reconnaissance Survey .................................................................................................. 24
3.4 Field Work and Sampling Techniques ........................................................................... 25
3.4.1 Questionnaires ......................................................................................................... 25
3.5 Water Quality ................................................................................................................. 26
Analysis3.5.1 Water Sampling ......................................................................................... 26
3.5.2 Microbial Analysis .................................................................................................. 27
3.5.3 Physico-chemical Analysis ...................................................................................... 28
3.6 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................. 29
CHAPTER 4 ........................................................................................................................... 30
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................................ 30
4.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristics ............................................................................... 30
4.2 Age of Respondents ....................................................................................................... 30
4.3 Gender of Respondents .................................................................................................. 30
4.4 Level of Education. ........................................................................................................ 31
4.5 Occupation of Respondents ............................................................................................ 32
4.6 Water Source Used for Drinking and Other Household Purposes ................................. 34
4.7 Quantity of Water Used by Respondents ....................................................................... 36
4.8 Accessibility of Water Sources Within the Study Area ................................................. 37
4.9 Availability and Reliability of Water Sources Within the Study Area .......................... 38
4.10 Affordability of Water Within Study Area .................................................................. 40
4.11 Consumer Perception of Water Quality ....................................................................... 41
4.12 Treatment of Water ...................................................................................................... 43
4.14 Water Quality levels of the various water sources at Fiapre ........................................ 44
4.14.1Biological Parameters ............................................................................................. 44
4.14.2 Physico-Chemical Parameters ............................................................................... 45
vii
CHAPTER 5 ........................................................................................................................... 46
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ................................................................... 46
5.1 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 46
5.2 RECOMMENDATION ................................................................................................. 47
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................... 48
viii
List of Tables
Table 2. 1 Acceptable standards for water quality parameters for drinking water from GWCL .......... 15
Table 2. 2 Drinking water ladder from JMP ......................................................................................... 17
Table 3. 1Water Quality Parameters and the Respective Standard Methods ........................................ 28
Table 4. 1 Age of respondents .............................................................................................................. 30

Table 4. 2 Gender distribution of the interviewed population .............................................................. 31
Table 4. 3 Level of education of respondents ....................................................................................... 32
Table 4. 4 Occupation of respondents ................................................................................................... 32
Table 4. 5 Summary of remaining socio-demographic characteristics ................................................. 33
Table 4. 6 Distribution of sources of water used for drinking and other household purposes .............. 35
Table 4. 7 Consumers’ level of satisfaction with their water supply service ........................................ 39
Table 4. 8 Perception of drinking water quality among respondents .................................................... 42
Table 4. 9 Biological Parameters of the various water sources at Fiapre ............................................. 45
Table 4. 10 Physico-Chemical Parameters of the various water sources at Fiapre ............................... 45
ix
List of Figures
Figure 1. 1 Residents of Savelugu-Nanton municipality drawing water from a stream for household
purposes .................................................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 2. 1 Illustration of a municipal water supply system ................................................................... 6

Figure 2. 2 Illustration of ground water .................................................................................................. 7
Figure 2. 3 Residence of Tsikata Kofe in the Kadjebi District fetching water from a surface source of
water........................................................................................................................................................ 7
Figure 2. 4 Accra Seawater Desalination Plant..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 2. 5 Effect of Illegal Mining in the Birim River. ....................................................................... 20
Figure 3. 1 Study Area .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Figure 3. 2 Study area showing households visited .............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 3. 3 Study area showing Water source visited ........................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 3. 4 Reconnaissance survey of the study area............................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 3. 5 Administration of questionnaires........................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 3. 6 Water sampling ................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 3. 7 Apparatus and Physico-chemical testing on the field. ........ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 4. 1 Quantity of water used by households within the study area ............ Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Figure 4. 2 a and b. Distribution of on-premise improved sources (left) and time spent on a round trip
to obtain water when improved sources are off premise (right) ........... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 4. 3 a and b. Distribution of various measures of water availability in Fiapre Error! Bookmark
not defined.
Figure 4. 4 UN threshold vrs user perception on affordability of water Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 4. 5 Distribution of user satisfaction with the prices of water ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
. Figure 4. 6 Distribution of respondents perception of the quality of water from their main sources
.............................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 4. 7 Distribution of respondents who perceive their sources of water to be of poor quality. .... 42
Figure 4. 8 Distribution of water treatment practiced by households ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
x
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
A water service perspective demands differentiation of what users receive beyond the simple
distinction between access to an improved or unimproved source. That differentiation is
expressed through service levels: the service that users receive in terms of water quality,
quantity, reliability and accessibility (IRC, 2014).
Water plays a key role in several aspects of society around the globe, ranging from a cultural
point of view to a recreational point of view. This importance of water and access to potable
was duly recognized in 2000 by the United Nations (UN) general assembly when the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were established, specifically, target 7C; Halve by
2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and
basic sanitation (United Nations Millennium Development Goals, n.d.). In 2015, the MDGs
were replaced by the current Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and it came as no
surprise to see more emphasis and a more direct approach being employed in tackling access
to potable water (SDG number 6 which says “clean water and sanitation by 2030”) despite the
significant strides made in achieving target 7C of the MDGs. Indeed, access to potable water
is considered by many to be a basic human right and on the 28th of July 2010, the UN set this
claim in stone through Resolution A/RES/64292, safe and clean drinking water and sanitation
were declared a human right essential to the full enjoyment of life and all other human rights
Ki-moon, (2015)
However, access to water supply goes beyond the broad and crude idea of the presence of water
within a locality. An appropriate and much more refined suggestion defines access to water
supply as the availability of at least 20 liters per capita per day from a source within 1 kilometer
of the user’s dwelling (Cairncross & Valdmanis, 2006). This definition of “Access to water
supply” brings to light all key components as stated in the opening statements of this report
regarding water service levels with an additional component of time which is directly linked to
distance. Much attention and emphasis from stakeholders and all agencies involved in the
provision of water must therefore not only be oriented around only availability, but must also
capture the quality, quantity and reliability aspect of water supply.
In the mix of all this, several diverse factors such as climate change, pollution, rapid population
growth, limited infrastructure, poverty, politics among many others gravely affect and burden
1
the water systems in several societies around the globe. The final results of the 2010 Population
and Housing Census (PHC) showed that the total population of Ghana as of 26th September,
2010 was 24,658,823. The results indicated that Ghana’s population increased by 30.4 percent
over the 2000 population figure of 18,912,079. The recorded annual intercensal growth rate in
2010 was 2.5 percent as against 2.7 percent recorded in 2000 (Ghana Statistical Service, 2012).
An increase in the population by about 30% compared to the previous recorded population
value of 2000 directly impacted the water systems, and with a growth rate of 2.5%, the
population of Ghana is expected to double by 2050 (Monney & Antwi-Agyei, 2018). This will
in turn lead to an even higher demand for access to potable water in the country. Consequently,
it is imperative for provision of potable water to be sustainable, efficient, universal and easily
accessible more so than ever in today’s 21st century, especially, in developing countries like
Ghana.
1.2 Problem Statement

Prior to the establishment of the Community Water and Sanitation Agency (CWSA), only 28%
of the rural population of Ghana had access to improved water sources (Chew et al., 2019).
Since then, there has been a massive improvement in water access for rural communities.
Coverage reported in 2008 for rural and small town water supply by the CWSA was 57 percent,
whilst the GWCL reported 58 percent as the urban water coverage, giving a national coverage
rate of 58% (AMCOW, 2015). From 2008 to 2018, the coverage rate for rural communities
increased by 5.06% with the 2018 coverage rate at 62.06% (CWSA, 2018).
However, in spite of the rather somewhat appealing numbers in terms of water coverage in
both the urban and rural areas, a whopping 76% of households in Ghana drink water that is
contaminated with faecal matter (UNICEF, 2019). In addition, access to improved drinking
water is currently estimated at 89%; 93% urban coverage and 84% rural coverage (2015
Update and MDG Assessment, 2015). This unpleasant situation leaves over 2 million
Ghanaians without access to potable water. This leads us to ask the question “what then do
these citizens have access to?”. Also, several rural settings resorting to multiple household
water sources is nearly universal and necessary in providing adequate water for daily use. As
a result of this, despite the increase in access to improved water sources in rural communities,
the use of unimproved water sources is still very common (Chew et al., 2019). Sadly, as is
shown in the figure below, some resort to various surface water bodies for household
activities.
2
Figure 1. 1 Residents of Savelugu-Nanton municipality drawing water from a stream for
household purposes.
Source. ircwash.org, Ghana, 2018
1.3 Research Question

Following up on the current situation spelled out by the problem statement, this study seeks to
provide answers to the following questions, but not limited to only those listed below:
▪ Why do users patronize their preferred source of water?

▪ Is the preferred source of water of good quality?
▪ How long does it take users to obtain water from the source for household purposes?
▪ What is the satisfaction of users on their current water sources and its supply?
▪ Do users in anyway make the water safer than it already is before use for household
purposes?
1.4 Aims and Objectives

The main aim of this study is to acquire data on the user perception of water service levels in
Fiapre a community in Sunyani West Municipal:
▪ To analyze and assess the sources and quantity of water used by households for drinking
and other purposes.
▪ To determine the accessibility, availability, affordability and reliability of the water
sources.
▪ To analyze the physico-chemical and microbial parameters of water through laboratory
work.
3
1.5 Justification
This project will provide insightful analytical evidence on viewer perception and laboratory
tests of water service levels in the Fiapre community. Laboratory tests and carefully structured
questionnaire have been prepared to aid in obtaining relevant information and data on all key
components captured under the definition of "access to water", thus, affordability, reliability,
quality and quantity, in order to provide a well-grounded foundation on which future research
on the topic under discussion can be continued and by so doing add to already existing
literature.
4
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Water as a Resource
Among all the natural resources available to man, water is considered by many to be the most
important as it helps to sustain life. It therefore comes as no surprise that, (Mythrey et al., 2012)
described water as an elixir. In alchemy, elixirs were used to refer to a cure all or a potion used
to transmute base metals to gold. Indeed, water is worth its weight in gold as a loss of water
could lead to diseases and even death (Mythrey et al., 2012). However, rapid population
growth, climate change and anthropogenic activities are all exerting stress on the current water
sources around the world. Activities such as mining and agriculture provide several benefits to
mankind, but at the same time leads to depletion of water sources. This makes it all the more
difficult and expensive for municipal water supply facilities to provide this elixir of life in
sufficient quantity and quality for domestic use. Aside from humans, aquatic organisms rely
solely on the existence of water for their survival. Mismanagement of this vital but delicate
resource could lead to several catastrophic results. Several aspects and contributors of life
directly or indirectly depend on water as well. For example, fishers rely on fish and other
aquatic organisms for economic survival. Ghana is blessed with several water bodies with the
Volta River, Tano river and Lake Bosomtwe among some of the well-known water sources.
Water and energy are the key factors for economic and population growth, and both are
increasingly scarce. While this is well known, the fact that they are inextricably linked is less
well understood (Rio Carrillo & Frei, 2009). The Akosombo Dam in Ghana is known to provide
hydroelectric power for millions of Ghanaians. However, erratic power supply and frequent
power cuts have become somewhat of a norm in Ghana in recent years. This is mostly attributed
to low levels of impounded water which affects several businesses in the process. It therefore
goes without doubt that, water resources must be protected and used sparingly as it is a finite
and vulnerable resource. In light of this, several management practices have been proposed by
several key stakeholders, but among them all Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM)
stands paramount and provides a more sustainable approach to protecting our water resources.
2.2 Uses of Water

Domestic use, irrigation, and industrial use are Ghana's three main uses for water. Surface
water, which is kept behind minor dams or diverted from rivers by weirs, is nearly exclusively
what municipal water supplies for home and industrial uses. However, groundwater sources
5
provide the majority of the water supply in rural areas. In the entire country, more than 10,000
boreholes have been provided as a result of the numerous groundwater development schemes.
Indoor and outdoor domestic uses of water include activities like drinking, cooking, bathing,
washing clothing and dishes, and flushing toilets. Domestic water consumption covers both the
use of potable and non-potable water supplies by private water companies and public water
utilities to households. The adult human needs two to five liters of drinkable water each day,
depending on the climate and the amount of activity they are doing, to maintain the body's
essential fluids and function physiologically.
Irrigation and industrial usage demand a lot of water. Water for irrigation purposes are mainly
drawn from dams through channels for the production of food in the agricultural sector while
the industrial use of water is for the production of goods and items.
2.3 Sources of Water

In general, sources of water available to users can be grouped into 5 namely;
▪ Municipal Water: This refers to a public water supply system or water supply network
including water treatment facilities, water storage facilities (reservoirs, water tanks and
water towers) and a pipe network for distributing the treated water to customers
including residential, industrial, commercial or institutional establishments (Water &
Wastes Digest, n.d.). In Ghana, GWCL is responsible for provision of municipal water.
The water distributed via a municipal water supply system may be obtained from one
of the other sources to be listed in the upcoming bullets or blended with two or more of
the other sources.
Figure 2. 1 Illustration of a municipal water supply system
Source. Hudson Valley Water Resources Inc, 2008
6
▪ Groundwater: This is the most popular source, groundwater or more specifically well
water. These are used for municipal sources, industrial use, water bottling plants,
mining and fracking Anupam, (2020). Hydraulic fracturing or fracking is a technique
used to enable the extraction of natural gas or oil from shale and other forms of “tight”
rock (in other words, impermeable rock formations that lock in oil and gas and make
fossil fuel production difficult). Large quantities of water, chemicals, and sand are
blasted into these formations at pressures high enough to crack the rock, allowing the
once-trapped gas and oil to flow to the surface (NRDC, n.d.). Groundwater is formed
when water travels through the soil, gets collected and stored between soil sediments
and cracks or fissures in rock material. The stored water can then be tapped by drilling
into the earth’s crust till the surface of the groundwater has been penetrated (the water
table).
Figure 2. 2 Illustration of ground water
Source. Byju’s 2021
▪ Surface water: As the name suggests, surface water refers to water that is stored on the
surface of the earth. Examples of surface water sources include rivers, ponds and
streams. Surface water bodies are among some of the most polluted water bodies one
can find. This is due to the water body being open to the atmosphere. Surface runoff
drains water into these bodies, sometimes carrying silt, plastic waste, liquid waste and
other harmful contaminants. Ironically, surface water bodies are recharged as a result
of precipitation (rainfall, snowfall, hail), which directly leads to surface runoff.
7
Figure 2. 3 Residence of Tsikata Kofe in the Kadjebi District fetching water from a surface
source of water
Source. gna.org, Ghana, 2021

▪ Rainwater: Rainwater and stormwater have unique characteristics in addition to
having little to no total dissolved salts (other than the catchment material). They are
typically low in pH and very soft, but need to be treated like surface water. Rainwater
primarily recharges surface water, for this fact, surface water and rainfall are sometimes
used interchangeably. However, there’s a distinction between surface water and rainfall
in the fact that, rainfall is the result of the condensation of water vapor in the atmosphere
which ultimately falls back to earth’s surface in the form of droplets of water. The water
that falls on the earth’s surface can be stored above ground and is referred to as surface
water.
▪ Seawater: About 75% of planet earth is covered by water, and is nicknamed “The blue
planet” owing to this fact. However, about 97.5% of the water covering the earth is
seawater, which is quite salty by nature. It therefore serves of little to no use in terms
of household activities and irrigation or farming purposes. It is known that, only about
2.5% of the total water available on earth is fresh water. However, about 75% of the
total fresh water is locked up in snow and ice caps. This therefore leaves a meager
0.5% of the fresh water for a host of uses in household activities, irrigation and other
purposes requiring the use of fresh water. In spite of the saltiness of seawater, it can be
treated to make the water useful for drinking and other household purposes. The
facilities required for the desalinization process however come at a very high cost. For
example, a desalinization plant was constructed in Accra in the year 2015 at a cost of
$125 million to produce about 60,000 m3 of potable water everyday (Water
Technology, n.d.).
8
Figure 2. 4 Accra Seawater Desalination Plant
Source. Water-technology.net n.d
2.4 Quality of Water

The aim of this study is to find out the user perception and laboratory test on water service
levels and provide a detailed assessment of each service level. According to Kaushik, (2011),
Water quality is affected by both point and non-point sources of pollution. These include
sewage discharge, discharge from industries, run-off from agricultural fields and urban run-
off. Contamination of Water takes place due to various chemical pollutants with the most
relevant being fluoride and arsenic contamination. Contrary to Kaushik, (2011), (Frone &
Frone, 2013) reports that sanitation facilities must be hygienically and physically safe to
use. The concept of water quality differs with respect to the intended use of water. It is obvious
that drinking water should meet other requirements than water for other uses (Rydhagen &
Universitet, 2007). Water also must be of such a quality so that it poses no risk to human health.
In addition, it also states that a holistic approach is required to get sustainable and equitable
access to water and sanitation in order to integrate solutions for access to safe water and
solutions for access to improved sanitation while also complying with all the different
dimensions of equitable access. In Ghana, it is reported that, a whopping 76% of households
are at risk of drinking water contaminated with fecal matter according. This is according to a
report by the United Nations Children’s Education Fund (UNICEF) (UNICEF, 2019). It is
therefore of utmost importance that, major advocacy on the use of improved water sources
should be encouraged in the country as these sources are likely to have relatively greater
protection from fecal contamination than unimproved sources (Esrey et al., 1991). The
presence or absence of suspended particles is also recognized as a requisite parameter to assess
the quality of water.
9
2.5 Water Quality Parameters
2.5.1 Physical Parameters
2.5.1.1 Taste and Odour
Taste and odour, these are among the most easily recognized physical properties which can be
used to predict the quality of water. Prescence of organic contaminants like fungi and algae
and chemically derived contaminants such as dissolved oxygen and chlorine affect both the
taste and smell of water depending on their individual concentrations within the source of
water. Water to be used for household activities should be devoid of any smells or taste. This
is because, the water becomes unpleasant especially when used for drinking. Depending on the
contaminant and its concentration too, if the water is used for washing, it could lead to
bleaching of clothes. Aside from organic and chemical contaminants, temperature could also
affect the taste and smell of water. When water is left in a stuffy storage container for a
longtime, a pungent smell begins to emanate from the water. It is for this reason that several
municipal water supply systems have aeration chambers before or after the alum dosage point
and also, vents at the final storage unit (clear well).
Taste and odour can originate from biological sources or processes as well (Aquatic
microorganisms - organic materials discharged directly to water bodies, such as falling leaves.
They go into biodegradation processes in the water bodies which can result in taste and odour-
producing compounds being released.)
Inorganic and organic chemical contaminants can also originate in water treatment and
transmission/storage/distribution facilities which could alter the taste or odour of water.
Examples of such instances include contamination by synthetic chemicals and corrosion or
they can be produced as a result of problems with water treatment (e.g., chlorination). The
cause of taste and odour problems in municipal water supply facilities should be investigated,
especially if there is a sudden or substantial change (Pure-H2O, n.d.).
2.5.1.2 Turbidity and Suspended Particles

In a general sense of view, turbidity refers to how clear water is (Light transmitting properties
of water) whereas suspended particles refer to particles larger than 2 microns suspended in
water. Both measures are therefore important indicators of water quality, and most especially
when involving user perception, as they affect the aesthetic of water. The suspended particles
could either be organic (humus, algae) or inorganic (plastics, debris). Though there is a clear
distinction between turbidity and suspended particles, the two are quite related in a sense that;
when a source of water is highly turbid, it looks milky or hazy, thus, reducing clarity of the
10
water. On the other hand, the presence of large quantities of suspended particles in water also
reduces clarity by making the water appear opaque. Suspended sediments present in water
bodies mostly comes from runoff and erosion. It is for this reason surface waters are among
the most contaminated or polluted bodies of water. Municipal water supply systems which rely
on surface water for raw water face problems of adequately treating the water to levels
acceptable for household activities. This could lead to unacceptably high levels of suspended
particles being found in water supplied to homes. Underground water bodies could also be
contaminated if the water table is quite close to surface waters containing high levels of
suspended particles. High quantities of suspended particles in water poses serious health risks
to users who ingest the water. It could also reduce the amount of aquatic vegetation available
to aquatic organisms as the light absorbing tendency of water is reduced. This could lead to
dire consequences up the food chain if the population of aquatic organisms decline below a
specific threshold.
2.5.1.3 Turbidity
Small particles have a tendency to scatter and absorb light when suspended in water. Turbidity
is the term used when the appearance of the water seems murky or turbid as a result of this
suspended particles. Some of these substances that cause turbidity include clay, silt, minute
pieces of organic matter, and microscopic organisms. They appear in water either naturally or
as a result of pollution and human activity Nathanson, (2000).
2.5.1.4 Temperature
Temperature affects palatability, viscosity, solubility, odors, and chemical reactions (APHA,
2005). Consequently, biological oxygen demand (BOD) and the chlorination and
sedimentation processes are temperature sensitive Davis,(2010). Additionally, it influences
how the dissolved heavy metals in water are bioabsorbed (Abbas et al, 2014). The majority of
individuals prefer water that is between 10-15°C in temperature (APHA, 2005).
2.5.1.5 Colour
Materials that have decomposed from organic matter, specifically flora, and inorganic debris,
such as soil, stones, and boulders, give water a color that is unpleasant for aesthetic reasons
only not health reasons Tomar, (1999). By contrasting the water sample with reference colors
or colored glass disks, color is measured. The color produced by a platinum solution containing
potassium chloroplatinate (K PtCl) at a concentration of 1 mg/L, is equivalent to one color unit
(APHA, 2005)
11
2.5.1.6 Electrical Conductivity
The electrical conductivity (EC) of water is a measurement of a solution's capacity to carry or
conduct an electrical current (Tchobanoglous, et al, 2003). Because ions in solution carry the
electrical current, conductivity rises as ions' concentrations do (APHA, 2005). As a result, it is
one of the key factors used to assess whether water is suitable for domestic uses, irrigation and
firefighting.
2.5.2 Chemical Parameters

2.5.2.1 pH
One of the most crucial aspects of water quality is pH. It is described as the hydrogen ion
concentration's negative logarithm. It is an arbitrary number that represents how strong an
acidic or basic solution is Hammer, (2011). Actually, water's pH is a gauge of how acidic or
basic it is (Tomar,1999). Excess hydrogen ions (H+) are present in acidic water, while extra
hydroxyl (OH-) ions are present in basic water Alley,( 2007).
2.5.2.2 Acidity
The amount of acids in a solution is measured as acidity. The quantitative ability of water to
neutralize a strong base to a chosen pH level is referred to as its acidity. Mineral acids, carbon
dioxide, and hydrolyzed salts like ferric and aluminum sulfates are the main causes of water
acidity. Acids can have an impact on a variety of processes, including biological activity,
chemical reactions, and corrosion. (APHA, 2005)
2.5.2.3 Alkalinity
The ability of water to neutralize acid is measured by the sum of all titratable bases (APHA,
2005). To calculate the amount of lime and soda needed for water softening (for example, to
control corrosion in the boiler feed water), the alkalinity of the water must be measured
(Tchobanoglous, et al, 2003). The major contributors to water's alkalinity are the ions
hydroxide (OH-), bicarbonate (HCO3-), and carbonate (CO32-), or a combination of two of these
ions.
2.5.2.4 Chloride
Chloride naturally occurs in lakes, streams, and groundwater, but a very high concentration of
chloride in freshwater (greater than 250 mg/L) may be a sign of wastewater contamination
(Chatterjee, 2001). Chlorides may enter surface water from a number of sources, including
wastewater, agricultural runoff, and rock that contains chlorides. Chloride ions Cl- in drinking
water have no negative health impacts on the general population, but excessive amounts can
give most individuals a taste of salt.
12
2.5.2.5 Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Organic materials are the food source for bacteria and other microbes. They take in oxygen as
they digest organic material (Tchobanoglous, et al, 2003). The microorganisms utilize the
energy released from the breakdown of the organics into simpler chemicals compounds such
as CO2 and H2O for growth and reproduction (APHA, 2005). The oxygen consumed during
this process in water determines the water's dissolved Oxygen (DO). The concentration of DO
will decrease as the bacteria break down the organic materials. If oxygen is not continuously
replenished by natural or artificial ways in the water. The biological oxygen demand (BOD)
refers to this need for oxygen.
2.5.2.6 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

The chemical oxygen demand (COD) is a parameter that assesses all organics, both those that
degrade through biodegradation and those that do not (Tchobanoglous, et al, 2003).It is a
chemical test that uses potassium dichromate, sulfuric acid, and heat, and the results can be
obtained within as little as two hours (APHA, 2005). For the same sample, COD values are
always greater than BOD values (Tchobanoglous, et al, 2003).
2.5.2.7 Hardness
A phrase used to describe the characteristics of heavily mineralized waters is "hardness"
(APHA, 2005). The dissolved minerals in water lead to issues like scale buildup in hot water
pipes and difficulty producing soap lather (Davis, 2010). In naturally occurring waters, calcium
(Ca2+) and magnesium (Mg2+) ions make up the majority of the hardness Spellman,( 2017).
They primarily enter water through contact with soil and rock, especially deposits of limestone
McGhee, (1991). In addition to bicarbonates and sulphates, these ions can also occasionally be
found as chlorides and nitrates (APHA, 2005). Groundwater is typically harder than surface
water.
The two types of hardness are:
• Temporary hardness which is due to carbonates and bicarbonates can be removed by

boiling, and
• Permanent hardness which is remaining after boiling is caused mainly by sulphates and
chlorides (APHA, 2005).
2.5.3 Microbial Parameters

A very important biological indicator of water and pollution is the group of bacteria called
coliforms Tomar, (1999). Pathogenic coliforms always exist in the intestinal system of humans,
13
and millions are excreted with body wastes Nathanson, (2004). Consequently, coliforms are
always present in water that has recently been contaminated with sewage (Tchobanoglous, et
al, 1985). Escherichia coli, sometimes known as E. coli, is one particular species of coliforms
found in domestic sewage (Tchobanoglous, et al, 2003). They are very likely to be discovered,
even if the water is only slightly contaminated. Approximately 3 million E. coli bacteria are
present in 100 mL of untreated sewage (APHA, 2005). These aggressive organisms known as
coliform bacteria can survive in water longer than most pathogens.
2.6 Water Quality Parameters Analysis

2.6.1 Temperature Analysis
Temperature is measured using a temperature sensor or a thermometer. The temperature sensor
of the probe is immersed in water to a depth of 10cm, allowed to stabilize and temperature read
in degrees Celsius (WHO, 2009).
2.6.2 pH Analysis
Water pH is examined using a Sens ION 1 pH meter. The probe is lowered into the water to a
depth of 10cm, allowed to stabilize and the pH read directly and recorded (Taruna and
Alankarita, 2013).
2.6.3 Electrical Conductivity Analysis

The electrical conductivity is examined using a Sens conductivity meter. The conductivity
probe is immersed in water to a depth of 10cm, allowed to stabilize and conductivity read in
micro siemens per centimetre (μs/cm) (WHO, 2009).
2.6.4 Turbidity Analysis

Turbidity is measured by an instrument called nephelometric turbidimeter, which expresses
turbidity in terms of NTU or TU. A TU is equivalent to 1 mg/L of silica in suspension. Turbidity
more than 5 NTU can be visible to the average person while turbidity in muddy water, it
exceeds 100 NTU.
2.6.5 Coliforms Analysis

A measured volume of sample is filtered through a special membrane filter by applying a partial
vacuum (APHA 2005). The filter, a flat paper-like disk, has uniform microscopic pores small
enough to retain the bacteria on its surface while allowing the water to pass through. The filter
paper is then placed in a sterile container called a petri dish, which contains a special culture
medium that the bacteria use as a food source Campanella, (2016).
14
Then, the petri dish is usually placed in an incubator, which keeps the temperature at 35°C, for
24 h. After incubation, colonies of coliform bacteria each containing millions of organisms will
be visible (APHA, 2005). The coliform concentration is obtained by counting the number of
colonies on the filter; each colony counted represents only one coliform in the original sample
(APHA, 2005).
Coliform concentrations are expressed in terms of the number of organisms per 100 mLof water
as follows;
coliforms per 100 mL = number of colonies × 100/mL of sample.
2.7 Parameters and their Ghana Standards by GWCL.

According to (Vacs, 2013), the Ghana Water Company Limited Water Quality Laboratory in
Tamale had pH, conductivity, turbidity, colour, temperature, E coli and total coliform as their
main water quality assessment parameters for samples taken from various sample locations in
the distribution systems.
Table 2. 1 Acceptable standards for water quality parameters for drinking water from GWCL
Water-Quality GWCL Standards. Health Implication
Parameters
pH 6.5 – 9 Taste alteration
Total Dissolved Solid 1000mg/L Scale formation
Temperature - Enhance pollution
Turbidity < 5 NTU Interferes with disinfection
Conductivity 0.005 – 0.05 S/m; Gastro-intestinal irritation
Colour 15 TCU Aesthetical unpleasing
E coli 0 count in 100m.L sample Gastroenteric disease
Total Coliform 0 count in 100m.L sample Indicate gastroenteric pathogens
Source. Vacs, 2013.
2.8 Accessibility to Water

Kaushik, (2011) provides a general idea of physical accessibility to water as; Water, and
adequate water facilities and services, must be within safe physical reach for all sections of the
15
population. From this definition, it can be said that, for a community or locality to be labelled
as having access to water, the proponents of providing the said water must be located at a
position where every member of the community can have access to it. This therefore also
includes the disabled. The definition falls perfectly in line with (Jones et al., 2002) on “Water
supply and sanitation access and use by physically disabled people” which says; Structural
adaptation and design of basic fittings and buildings, aids and equipment specifically devised
to provide access and use of the domestic water cycle should be included for disabled members
of the population.
On the other hand, Woodhouse, (2004) argues that access to water can be looked at from two
angles, the community level and the individual level. At the community level; physical
accessibility is to provide water and water facilities and services on a non-discriminatory basis,
especially for disadvantaged groups; To ensure physical access to water services that provide
sufficient, safe and regular water that have sufficient water outlets to avoid prohibitive waiting
times; and that are at a reasonable distance from the household; To ensure equitable distribution
of all available water facilities and services. At the individual level however, Woodhouse,
(2004) says that access to water means that; To ensure access to the minimum essential amount
of water, that is sufficient and safe for personal and domestic uses to prevent disease; To ensure
personal security is not threatened when having to fetch water; To take measures to prevent,
treat and control diseases linked to water, in particular, ensuring access to adequate sanitation.
Delving into this definition therefore means that, outside of the water and facilities being
located at a vantage point, the quantity and quality of the water must also be ensured. Safety of
the users must also be guaranteed at all times. At the same time, Woodhouse,( 2004) also agrees
with what both Kaushik,(2011) and Jones et al., (2002) say about total inclusion of the
population of users (a non-discriminatory approach).
From (Peprah et al., 2015), it could be distinguished that accessibility to a facility can be either
high, medium or low. That is, within a particular country, region, or even a community,
accessibility to users of a particular facility would differ being either high, medium or low. It
therefore conforms to the fact that; priority must be given to the levels of accessibility rather
than concentrate on just the existence of facilities provided to aid water delivery.
Improved drinking water as defined by the Joint Monitoring Program (JMP) refers to sources
of water which by nature of their design and construction, have the potential to deliver safe
water (JMP, n.d.). The JMP goes further to subdivide the population using improved sources
16
into three groups according to the level of service provided. In order to meet the criteria for a
safely managed drinking water service, households must use an improved source that is:
▪ Accessible on premises,
▪ Available when needed, and
▪ Free from contamination.
Consequently, the JMP sought to benchmark and compare service levels across countries in
order to facilitate efficient monitoring of drinking water, sanitation and hygiene. This led to the
creation of a service ladder for drinking water as follow;
Table 2. 2 Drinking water ladder from JMP

Table 2. Drinking water ladder from JMP
SAFELY MANAGED
Drinking water from an improved water source that is accessible on premises, available
when needed and free from fecal and priority chemical contamination.
BASIC
Drinking water from an improved source, provided collection time is not more than 30
minutes for a roundtrip including queuing.
LIMITED
Drinking water from an improved source for which collection time exceeds 30 minutes for a
roundtrip including queuing.
UNIMPROVED
Drinking water from an unprotected dug well or unprotected spring.
SURFACE WATER
Drinking water directly from a river, dam, lake, pond, stream, canal or irrigation canal.
Source. JMP 2017
2.9 Availability of Water

From the discussions made about the sources of water, the availability of water from the said
sources comes into question. Under human rights law, there must be a sufficient number of
water and sanitation facilities and water must be available continuously and in a sufficient
quantity to meet personal and domestic needs, which includes drinking, bathing, hygiene,
cooking and washing clothes and dishes. Determining the required amount of water and
number of toilets will depend on a local assessment of community and individual needs (Frone
& Frone, 2013). However, availability of water goes beyond just the mere presence of water.
It includes the quality of the water being able to be used for a variety of purposes. Supply of
17
water is not a magical phenomenon and therefore involves a complex set of operations and
procedures to ensure water is available for users. In the case of municipal water supply, a source
of raw water is required to be treated and then distributed. This could be either surface water
or a combination of the other sources of water spelled out in the opening paragraphs of chapter
2. In Ghana, majority of water supplied through the municipal system represented by GWCL
draw their raw water from surface water bodies. For example, the Abessim water treatment
plant in the Bono region of Ghana has its raw water intake from the Tano river. Several factors
ranging from climate change, illegal mining and seasons of the year affect the amount and
quality of water stored by each source of water all of which eventually affect the availability
of water to users.
2.10 Climate Change

Climate change is now a scientifically established fact. The exact impact of greenhouse gas
emission is not easy to forecast and there is a lot of uncertainty in the science when it comes to
predictive capability, but we now know enough to recognize that there are large risks and in
fact potentially catastrophic ones. Therefore, climate change demands urgent action now in
order to address a threat to at least two constituencies with a weak political voice: the world’s
poor and future generations (Adabor, 2012). Climate change has been ongoing for several
decades and is largely contributed to human actions on the environment. Demand for fossil
fuels, deforestation, intensive farming, waste disposal and mining are but a few activities
known to effect climate change around the world. Several risks and problems are brought
about by climate change with changes in weather the most relevant to this research. In Ghana,
several activities are carried out with fore knowledge on the natural weather patterns. But with
changing weather patterns, rainfall and seasons of the year are getting more and more difficult
to predict. Reduced rainfall as a result of climate change is also ultimately affecting the amount
of water stored by water sources recharged directly from rainfall. Surface water and
underground water sources being the most affected. With less rainfall being recorded, the
amount of water previously stored in rivers, lakes and underground water sources is dwindling.
Coupled with rapid population growth and an ever-increasing demand for potable water, the
total water available to users is gradually reducing. This has led several individuals within
Kumasi to rely on other sources of water (Appiah-Effah et al., 2021).
According to (Lutz et al., 2015), there may be undesired effects when fluctuations of
groundwater levels and recharge patterns are not well understood. For instance, hand pump
failure may occur when seasonal and inter-annual fluctuations of groundwater levels are not
18
known. Boreholes drilled immediately after seasonal precipitation may be at depths where
groundwater is not available throughout the year. In this case, groundwater is not seasonably
sustainable. Within the aquifer system, the consequences of groundwater fluctuation include
alteration of groundwater flow regimes and changes in the volume and quality of groundwater
resources available, while changes in precipitation, even at small scales, likely influence
recharge patterns and the response of groundwater levels in aquifers. When groundwater is
pumped in excess of recharge, groundwater levels decline. In the case of hand pumps, it can
become physically difficult to pump from increasingly lower depths, and there can be greater
mechanical stress and wear on the hand pump parts, ultimately leading to mechanical failure.
2.11 Illegal Mining

Mining contributes massively to direct foreign investment in Ghana (Boadi et al., 2016). In
fact, the contribution of the mining sector to GDP has risen steadily from about 13 percent in
1991 to 62 percent in 2008 and additionally contributed to 44 percent of the country’s gross
export revenue in 2008 (Salifu et al., 2013). However, the rise in illegal mining is leading to a
destruction of several water sources in the country at the same time. The activity of illegal
mining popularly known as galamsey within the confines of Ghana in reserved forests is seen
as a major threat to sustainable forest management and impact on livelihoods of communities.
The Offin shelterbelt forest reserve in Ghana has been plagued by illegal mining since the year
2010. Currently, information on the extent of mining driven deforestation and degradation of
forest reserves, as well as its impacts on livelihoods is limited (Boadi et al., 2016). As is already
known, deforestation effects climate change. The activities of illegal mining in deforestation
are widely spoken across Ghana and directly affects the amount of precipitation. This known
is a known fact backed by evidence provided by research by conducted by (Change, 2014).
With less rainfall, surface water bodies have less water stored and less water also being
infiltrated into underground water sources. This leads to lowering of the water table and makes
it harder to obtain water from these sources. In order for boreholes and wells to be constructed,
the drilling process will have to go deeper in order to hit the water table. This increases the
overall cost of the process even though development of underground water sources is known
to cost less than treating surface water for supply (Lutz et al., 2015). In fact, due to illegal
mining, it is widely reported that by the year 2030, Ghana might have to import water (Ghana
Web, 2018). Should this happen, it will without doubt affect the availability of water available
to especially the poor. Whatever it is though, the poor have no say in the matter.
19
Dangerous chemicals like mercury are also used in mining for gold within several communities
in Ghana. Mercury adversely affects aquatic organisms while polluting the rivers. For example,
In Fenaso, small-scale and illegal mining are controlled by the rich who employ the use of
sophisticated equipment resulting in the modification of landscapes and potentially having a
long-term impact on communities and the natural resources due to their physically degrading
nature (Duncan, 2020).
Figure 2. 5 Effect of Illegal Mining in the Birim River.

Source. Graphiconline.com, Ghana, Sep - 07 - 2018
2.12 Seasons of the Year

Ghana has only two seasons, the dry and wet seasons. The wet season is characterized by
rainfalls and carries on from May to September in the northern part of the country. Meanwhile,
the southern part of Ghana has its rains lasting between the months of April and November
(CLIMATES TO TRAVEL, n.d.). However, as a direct result of climate change, West Africa
has undergone a period of declining rainfall, punctuated by a series of severe droughts and
marked by a shift in rainfall regime towards a longer dry season and a vanishing wet season
(Owusu et al., 2008). As a result, it has become quite difficult for farmers and all who depend
on rainfall for activities to accurately determine the months when the rains begin. And even
more difficult to determine how long the rains will last when they finally come. In the same
vein, the dry season in Ghana is characterized by very dry weather and the harmattan. During
this time, the rains cease and surface water bodies begin to dry up. The water table also lowers
as there is little to no infiltration to recharge underground water sources. Lower water tables
mean, users of boreholes have to pump for longer periods for water to flow. It is also possible
for the water table to be at a level so low that, the borehole becomes practically unusable
because water does not flow through them no matter how much pumping is done (Lutz et al.,
2015).
20
2.13 Reliability of Water Sources
Once accessibility and availability of a water source can be assured in a locality, in comes the
reliability of the water source. A water source is said to be reliable when it consistently
performs well. Therefore, the quality and quantity of water required by users for household
activities should always be met no matter the time of day.
According to the CWSA Regulations Legislative Instrument (L.I. 2007) of 2011, the following
standards should be adhered to for the sub-sector;
▪ A person who designs a community water facility shall ensure that each person in a
served community has access to not less than twenty liters of water per day.
▪ The walking distance to a water facility or delivery point in the case of a piped scheme
does not exceed five hundred meters from the farthest house in the community or a
section of the community.
▪ The facility provides safe water to the community throughout the year.
Consequently, considering piped systems, the Legislative Instrument states that the delivery of
water should be virtually uninterrupted, at least ninety-five per cent of the time. This means
that the facility should provide services for at least 347 days in the year or a maximum of 18
days downtime.
On the other hand, Woodhouse, (2004) argues that, for the right to water to be realized, an
individual must have access to 20 liters of water per day and the state has a continuing
responsibility to enable this quantity to increase to 50 l/c/d, at which point the right to a
minimum essential quantity of water will have been realized. From both the LI of the CWSA
and Woodhouse, it can be concluded that the minimum amount of water required each day
should be pegged at 20 l/c/d.
2.14 Quantity of Water

Water as a resource is required in sufficient quantity to sustain life. Prevalence of diarrheal
cases in Ethiopia has been recorded to be lower in families where infants under 2 years had
higher water usage rates than those of families with lower rates (Esrey et al., 1991). In addition,
provision of sufficient water for household activities can lead to an increase in generation of
income while reducing poverty. This is backed by findings from a research conducted by (Hein
et al., 2006). From the findings of these researches, it is clear that, the importance of safe and
clean water in sufficient quantities cannot be overrated. The UN acknowledged access to
potable water as a basic human right (Ki-moon, 2015) and true to that claim, the World Health
21
Organization (WHO) provided a minimum of 20 l/c/d and 100 l/c/d as a minimum quantity to
ensure all hygiene and consumption needs are appropriately met (Howard Guy & Bartram
Jamie, 2003). However, at the same time, the figures quoted are just estimations of required
quantities of water adopted by the international community of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
sector and can differ in actuality from one place to another.
2.15 Affordability of Water

Safe water, water facilities and services, and the direct and indirect costs and charges associated
with securing water, must be affordable for all. This ties in with the concept of affordability
and this is understood as a cost that does not demand more than 5% of a family’s monthly
income (WaterAid, 2012).
On the other hand, (Frone & Frone, 2013) argues that Water and sanitation and water facilities
and services must be affordable to all people in a way which does not limit people’s ability to
afford other essential basic services. It further adds that, Water and sanitation services do not
need to be free of charge for everyone, but solutions must be found to ensure that those living
in poverty are able to access these services despite their limited capacity to pay. (WaterAid,
2012) and (Frone & Frone, 2013) both acknowledge that the cost involved in obtaining water
should not overwhelm a household such that enjoyment of other human rights is overshadowed.
The latter however fails to give a definite threshold above which conclusions can be drawn
saying a source of water is not affordable to a household in question.
The UN also agrees with both (WaterAid, 2012) and (Frone & Frone, 2013) but quotes a value
of 3% of the household’s income as the recommended threshold (United Nations, n.d.).
22
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Description of Study Area
The study was carried out in the Sunyani west Municipal in the Bono Region of Ghana, Fiapre.
The Sunyani west Municipal has a population of about 136,022 with 67,251 being male and
68,771 females (Ghana Statistical Service, 2014).
Fiapre is located at latitude 7.36399° north and longitude -2.34842° west at an elevation of
about 284 m. The community is about 6.6 kilometer from the central business district of
Sunyani. Their main source of water is ground water which is made available through
communal boreholes/hand-dug wells or individually owned boreholes/hand-dug well.
Individual and Communal boreholes pump groundwater directly into storage tanks with or
without treatment before usage. Inhabitants who fetch from communal point source store water
in barrels or gallons in their homes before usage. Inhabitants are mostly petty traders and
farmers with few having white collar jobs. The community is unplanned with low sanitation
coverage. There are several hostels and “homestels” within the community where students from
UENR and Catholic University college reside. The study was carried out on only households
where indigenes reside in the community.
Figure 3. 1 Study Area

Source. Generated from ArcGIS
23
3.2 Data Collection.
During the study, two broad classes of data will be collected; quantitative and qualitative data.
Water was also collected in sample bottles from the various water source for laboratory
analysis. In order to obtain the required data, a reconnaissance survey will be conducted.
Figure 3. 2 Study area showing households visited
Source. Map generated from KoboCollect Toolbox. Points of questionnaires administered.
Figure 3. 3 Study area showing Water sources sampled

Source; Map Water Sampling Points generated from Google Earth App.
3.3 Reconnaissance Survey

This was carried out prior to the field work with the sole purpose of getting ourselves up to
date with the happenings in the study area. It was used to identify locations within the
community where majority of the residents would be indigenes and not students from UENR
24
and Catholic University College and also to help us identify the various water sources in our
area of study. It was carried out in the month of August, 2022.
Figure 3. 4 Reconnaissance survey of the study areaSource. Field Survey, August 2022
3.4 Field Work and Sampling Techniques

3.4.1 Questionnaires
The field work was carried out during the month of August, 2022. The purpose of the field
work is to obtain specific data relating to the research topic in the selected community. A
carefully structured questionnaire was administered to the residents using KoboCollect
Toolbox on android. The questionnaires include both open-ended and closed questions.
The questionnaires tackle various aspects of the project listed below, but not limited to the
following;
• Sources of water used for drinking and other household purposes.

• The perception of users on the quality of water used for drinking and other household
purposes.
• The level of satisfaction of users’ perception on the reliability, affordability and
availability of their identified sources of water.
• The time taken by users to obtain water from their identified source and back to their
homes.
25
Figure 3. 5 Administration of questionnaires.
Source; Field Survey, August 2022

A total of 129 questionnaires were administered in the community. The households visited was
randomly selected to prevent any bias in the data collection. After collection of the data, careful
scrutiny and filtration of the filled questionnaires was carried out to ensure all data collected
during the field work were qualified enough for analysis. This resulted in the removal of 9
questionnaires from those administered in the field. The final number of filled questionnaires
which were qualified were therefore reduced to 120
Some of the faults which led to the removal of questionnaires included; uncompleted forms
and extremely close proximities of some GPS locations of households visited.
3.5 Water Quality

Analysis3.5.1 Water Sampling
Twenty-seven (27) water sources were randomly selected at different points in the community
for sampling, nine (9) public boreholes, nine (9) from GWCL sources and (9) hand-dug wells.
Each sample station was sampled twice in two different 500ml bottle and labelled accordingly.
The bottles used for sampling was cleaned thoroughly with 10% hydrochloric acid (HCl) and
rinsed repeatedly with deionized water as suggested by (De, 1989). To stop the bacteria from
proliferating, the samples collected in the field were stored in a cold setting (less than 4oc) and
shielded from UV light. The samples were transported to the University of Energy and Natural
Resources (UENR), Chemistry laboratory within six (6) hours from the point of collection.
This was done during the month of August, 2022.
26
Figure 3. 6 Water sampling
3.5.2 Microbial Analysis

3.5.2.1Determination of coliforms bacteria
This was done using the Colony Forming Unit (CFU) approach. Using the required serial
decimal dilutions of the water sample, this procedure counts the colonies that result. The culture
medium was Sorbitol MacConkey, and the reagent employed was normal saline.
3.5.2.1 Procedure
Using a serial dilution approach, 1 mL of the water sample was added to a test tube containing
9 mL of normal saline and this resulted in a dilution of 10-1. Using separate sterile pipettes,
decimal dilutions of 10-2, 10-3, etc were prepared by transferring 1 mL of the previous
dilutions to 9 mL of diluents (normal saline). Using the pour-plate technique, mL of the diluted
water sample was inoculated into sterile Petri plates after which 10-12mL of the molten
sterilized Sorbitol MacConkey (agar cooled to 44°C - 47°C) was poured into each Petri plate.
After complete solidification, the prepared plates were inverted and incubated under different
temperatures according to the targeted bacteria (35±0.5°C for 24±2h for Total Coliform;
44±0.2°C for 24±2 h for faecal coliform and 37°C for 21±3h for Escherichia coli). The number
of colonies collected on a MacConkey plate from particular dilutions was used to calculate the
number of microorganisms per millilitre in the sample. Each apparent colony was said to have
formed as a result of multiplexing a single cell on the agar surface.
27
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝐶𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑋 𝐷𝑖𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟
Calculation and Expression of Results CFU/mL/plate =
𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒
Table 3. 1Water Quality Parameters and the Respective Standard Methods

Water Quality Parameters Standard Methods (Guidelines)
pH WHO
Temperature WHO
Turbidity WHO
Total Dissolved Solid WHO
Electrical Conductivity WHO
Total Coliforms WHO
E. coli WHO
Source; WHO Water Quality Parameters, 2011
3.5.3 Physico-chemical Analysis

The physico-chemical parameters were determined according to procedures outlined in the
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA, 2012). Turbidity was
measured using a Turbidimeter, pH by pH Meter, Conductivity was measured with
conductivity meter, temperature measured with a thermometer. These water quality parameters
were measured on site.
Figure 3. 7 Apparatus and Physico-chemical testing on the field.

28
3.6 Data Analysis
The collected data were analyzed using the software “Statistical Package for Social Scientists
(SPSS)” in conjunction with Microsoft Excel, to produce tables, charts and graphs to provide
a visual representation of respondents’ views. The results were compared with the WHO
guideline limits for physico-chemical and microbial parameters for portability.
The Geographic Information System (GIS) software “Quantum GIS (QGIS) was used to plot
the GPS coordinates to provide a spatial view of the households visited and the water samples
stations. It was also used as a means in discarding questionnaires which fell short of the
required criteria.
29
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristics
Under this section of the report, the characteristics of the population interviewed relating to
gender, age, household size among others are brought to light. This part of the results helps to
lay the foundation upon which the discussions and data analysis can be made. For example, it
is expected that a family with a large household size uses more water per day. However, this
might not always be the case, especially when the household income is considered in relation.
4.2 Age of Respondents

Data gathered showed that, the majority of the respondents were in their youthful active ages
(18-39 which represented about 60.9 of the respondents). It is therefore expected that, majority
of the respondents should fall within the working class. The ages of respondents ranged from
19-75 with a mean age of 34.88 years. A standard deviation of 11.504 was recorded which
indicates the recorded ages were quiet far apart from the mean age of 34.88 years.
Table 4. 1 Age of respondents

Age of respondents
Frequency Percentage (%)
Number of respondents 120 100
18-28 23 19.2
29-39 50 41.7
40-50 28 23.2
51-61 11 9.2
62-72 5 4.2
73 and above 3 2.5
Source. Field survey, August 2022
4.3 Gender of Respondents

The results of the field work revealed a very wide situation in the distribution of genders within
the study areas. Out of the 120 households which made the final cut, 41 of them were males
which represented about 34.2% of the respondents. The remaining 65.8% of the respondents
were female which translates to 79 of the total population interviewed. The distribution of the
30
genders within the population interviewed can be said that, it does not correlate with the
national distribution of 48.8 % being males and 51.2% females (Ghana Statistical Service,
2012). In addition, the Harvard Business Review states that women still do more of the
domestic work and childcare — almost twice as much as their male partners (Gender Equity
Starts in the Home, n.d.). From this assertion, it can be said that the reason for which more
females were interviewed during the field work is as a result of women having more household
duties and chores, thus, the likelihood of them being at home is higher. Whereas their male
counterparts have less to do, hence might not necessarily be found at home. According to
Dublin principles (IWCE, 1992), it is also noted that, Women play a central role in the
provision, management and safeguarding of water. This also informed decision to engage more
females. The field work was conducted mostly during weekends.
Table 4. 2 Gender distribution of the interviewed population

Gender distribution of the interviewed population
Male 41 34.2
Female 79 65.8
Source. Field Survey, 2022
4.4 Level of Education.

The educational level of people determines largely the nature of inhabitants’ responses and
understanding of the issues at stake (Adabor, 2012). Information obtained revealed that 100% of
the respondents had some sort of education, be it primary, JHS, SHS or tertiary. Respondents
who had education up to the JHS level represented the most of the interviewed population with
34.2% of the total respondents. Primary school education was however the least with 18.3% of
the respondents (22 out of 120). Data obtained from the research agreed with the comments of
(Adabor, 2012) as 100% of the respondents had basic knowledge on the issue at stake. This was
attributed to the fact that, out of the 120 respondents, every single one of them had at least basic
education.
31
Table 4. 3 Level of education of respondents
Level of education of respondents
Primary/Basic 22 18.3
JHS/JSS/Middle school 41 34.2
SHS/SSS 30 25
Tertiary 27 22.5
4.5 Occupation of Respondents

Referring to the data once again, about 86% of the respondents were employed. This figure is
represented by those who fall within either of self-employed, public sector and private sector.
This leaves just about 14% of the respondents in the bracket of those without jobs (retired and
unemployed). This value of 86% shows that, our expectation of majority of the respondents
falling within the working class was indeed right. This figure is significantly higher than the
68.7% people employed in the Bono Ahafo region as reported in GLASS 7(Ghana Statistical
Service, 2012). The study also found that, majority of the respondents were self-employed
(44.2%) which is significantly much lower than the 58% reported by (Appiah-Effah et al.,
2021).
Table 4. 4 Occupation of respondents

Occupation of respondents
Self-Employed 53 44.2
Public sector 26 21.7
Private sector 24 20.0
Retired 5 4.2
Unemployed 12 10.0
32
Table below provides a summary of the remaining socio-demographic characteristics
(household size and household income) of the respondents within the study area.
Table 4. 5 Summary of remaining socio-demographic characteristics

Summary of remaining socio-demographic characteristics
Demographic Characteristic
Household Size
1-3 36 30.0
4-7 80 66.7
8-11 3 2.5
16 and above 1 0.8
Household Income
GHS 20-520 16 13.3
GHS 521-1021 35 29.2
GHS 1022-1522 34 28.33
GHS 1523-2023 14 11.7
GHS 2024-2524 12 10
GHS 2525-3025 4 3.33
GHS 3026-3526 4 3.33
Source. Field Survey, August 2022
An average household size of 4.61 was recorded and this is a higher than both the Sunyani
West Municipal Assembly (SWMA) household size (Ghana Statistical Service, 2014) and
(Appiah-Effah et al., 2021) household sizes of 3.8 and 4.41 respectively.
33
Results from the study also proved that, majority of the respondents (13.3%) earn between
GHS 20-520 per month with an average income of GHS 1,355.78. According to (Ghana
Statistical Service, 2014), the extreme poverty line per adult equivalent per year is pegged at
GHS 792.05. From the data collected, the minimum income was GHS 50 and the highest
recorded was GHS 3500. This means that, 0.8% of the respondents fell below the extreme
poverty line (1 out 120 respondents earned GHS 50 per month. This gives a yearly take home
salary of about GHS 600). The remainder of the respondents had a take home salary above
GHS 792.05 with the expected highest take home salary calculated to be about GHS 42,000
(1.7%; 2 out of 120).
4.6 Water Source Used for Drinking and Other Household Purposes
The results of the research showed that, bottled/sachet water accounted for the majority of
preferred drinking water sources in the community. This was represented by 74.2% of the total
respondents. The remainder of the water sources used for drinking water was represented by
Borehole/hand pipe, wells (protected) and pipe-borne water, which constituted; Piped water to
dwelling, Piped water to yard/compound and public tap/standpipe. Borehole/hand pipe proved
to be the second favorite source of drinking water and accounted for 12.5% of the respondents
while pipe-born water accounted for just 9.1% of the respondents and 4.1% of the respondent
relied on dug well. Reliance on sachet water by households as the main source of drinking was
in accordance with the findings of (Ghana Statistical Service, 2018). This is largely due to the
ubiquitous nature and relatively lower price of sachet water (Stoler, 2013). In addition,
properties such as color, taste and appearance might also account for the high dependence of
residents on sachet water. However, results of this research proving borehole/hand pipe to be
the second favorite drinking water source deviated from the results of GLSS 7 (Ghana
Statistical Service, 2012). This can be attributed to the fact that, the questionnaire administered
to respondents during the field work did not consider boreholes/hand pipes being connected to
a pipe-borne facility. Rather it was considered as a standalone source, hence, the deviation from
the reported findings of GLSS 7.
34
Table 4. 6 Distribution of sources of water used for drinking and other household purposes
Distribution of sources of water used for drinking and other household purposes
Sources of drinking water
Piped water to dwelling 4 3.3
Piped water to yard/compound 6 5
Protected dug Well 5 4.2
Public tap/standpipe 1 0.8
Borehole/hand pipe 15 12.5
Bottled/sachet water 89 74.2
Other household purposes
Piped water to dwelling 7 5.8
Piped water to yard/compound 9 7.5
Public tap/standpipe 11 9.2
Borehole/hand pipe 72 60
Protected dug well 12 10
Other (Borehole to dwelling) 9 7.5
Aside from drinking water, the research also reported findings on preferred sources of water
for other household purposes. The data shows that, reliance on borehole/hand pipe constituted
the most widely used source for bathing, cooking etc. (60% or n=72). The results of our
research is consistent with (Norvivor, 2013) who reported a high dependence on groundwater
in Ketu-South district for domestic activities. Though sachet water has already being
established as a cheap source of water, in order to carry out household activities such bathing
and cooking, copious amounts of water is required which cannot be achieved using the
traditional 500 ml plastics used to package sachet water. In addition, demand for water is so
high that at any given time, GWCL can only produce enough water to fill about half of Accra’s
pipe network. As a result, GWCL implements a rationing program that is influenced by
35
geography—those living near large capacity water mains and valves may have better access—
and by income the wealthy generally enjoy the best maintenance and service levels (Stoler,
2013). It is for these reasons that, many users have resorted to other sources with dependence
on borehole/hand pipe being the cheapest and most logical option. This provides an explanation
as to 60% of respondents within the study area rely on groundwater for bathing and cooking.
The findings of this research are consistent with GLSS 7 which reports borehole/hand pipe
water as the most preferred choice of water for general use in the Bono Ahafo Region (42.5%
of the entire population). Our report also shows just a little above 25% for pipe-borne water.
Results also showed that, reliance on rainfall for bathing and cooking was almost inexistent
and is backed by GLSS 7 which also reports 0.1% reliance on rainfall for general use in Bono
Ahafo Region.
4.7 Quantity of Water Used by Respondents

Majority of the respondents (73.3%) used between 100-299 liters per day. The least amount of
water used was between 5-99 liters represented by 9.2% of the total respondents. Though the
quantity of water used was categorized in ranges, no household reported to use less than 20
liters of water per day. This therefore shows that, 100% of the households met the minimum
requirement stipulated by WHO to ensure all hygiene and consumption needs are appropriately
met (Howard Guy & Bartram Jamie, 2003). These results are also consistent with (Nunoo et
al., 2018) who reported an average of 133.0563 liters of water used by Ghanaians.
80 73.3%
70
60
% of Households
50
40
30
17.5%
20
9.2%
10
0
100-299 Liters 300-399 Liters 5-99 Liters
Liters Per Day
Figure 4. 1 Quantity of water used by households within the study area

36
4.8 Accessibility of Water Sources Within the Study Area
From the analysis of the presented data concerning the sources of water, it was established that
improved sources of water formed 100% of all the water sources respondents in community
rely on. A figure 14% above the quoted national of 86% by MICS. This was verified because,
out of the 120 respondents, none provided information on the use of unprotected wells or
springs, surface water collected directly from a river, dam, lake, stream or irrigation canal.
The accessibility of improved water sources on the premises of households were properly
documented during the course of this study. The data proved that, 45.8% (n=55) of households
within the study areas had improved water sources available on the premises. This, according
to the respondents meant that, they spent less than 3 minutes round trip to obtain water for
household activities. This figure however slightly exceeds the 40% of households estimated to
have improved water sources on premises quoted for Ghana by (MICS, 2019). This slight
increment may probably be due to the 40% being quoted by MICS accounting for the entirety
of Ghana, whereas the findings of this study consider just a small portion (Fiapre) out of Ghana.
N= 120 n= 65
Improved Water ON Premises 45.83% 120
100%
100
% of Respondants
80
Improved 60
Improved
Water ON
Water 40
Premises
OFF
45.83%
Premises 20
46%
54.17% 0
54% 0
< 30min > 30min
Time in Minute
Figure 4. 2 a and b. Distribution of on-premise improved sources (left) and time spent on of
household a round trip to obtain water when improved sources are off premise of household
(right)
Source; Field Survey, August 2022.
On the other hand, 54.2% (n=65) of the respondents had to cover a distance from their
respective households to access drinking water. Of the 65 households, 100% of them spent less
than 30 min round trip to obtain water from an improved source. This result is very consistent
with the 99% figure quoted by (Appiah-Effah et al., 2021) but much more higher than the 71%
and 47% quoted for both urban and rural areas respectively by (MICS, 2019).
37
Therefore, from the analysis of the data concerning accessibility of water, we can safely
conclude that, 100% of the households have access to at least basic water service. This is
significantly higher than the 79% reported by MICS for Ghana.
4.9 Availability and Reliability of Water Sources Within the Study Area
Availability and reliability of water sources are intertwined. The presence of water in the
required amount and quality makes the water available. At the same time, the fulfillment of
these parameters at all times makes the source reliable. Therefore, it is impossible to elaborate
on the availability of a water source without considering the reliability and vice versa. Majority
of the respondents were quite vocal and provided well informed views on the availability and
reliability of their water sources. The study brought to light the following findings;
68.3% of the respondents were found to always have water (all the days of the week) while
31.7% of the respondents were found to have water on some days of the week but not
throughout the week. The reported figure of 68.3% provided by this study is slightly lower than
the 72% provided by the study conducted in the Oforikrom municipal by (Appiah-Effah et al.,
2021) and at the same time is much lower than the reported 89% of households in rural settings
reported to have drinking water available in sufficient quantities when needed by (MICS,
2019).
N= 120 FIG A
Yes-Always 68.3% No-Not Always 31.7%
32%
68%
38
n= 120 fig b
80 72.5%
70
60
% of Households
50
40
30
19.2%
20
6.7%
10 0.8% 0.8%
0
24 Hours Irregular 6-8 Hours I Don't Know 3-5 Hours
Number of Hours
Series 1
Figure 4. 3 a and b. Distribution of various measures of water availability in Fiapre Source; Field
Survey, August 2022.
The findings of the report also showed that, 72.5% of the households had water flowing for 24
hours on days it flowed. The least recorded was represented by households who had water
flowing for only 3-5 hours and “I don’t know” hours on days water flowed (n=1 respectively).
Table 4. 7 Consumers’ level of satisfaction with their water supply service

Consumers’ level of satisfaction with their water supply service
Very satisfied 16 13.3
Satisfied 64 53.3
Neutral 19 15.8
Unsatisfied 15 12.5
Very unsatisfied 6 5
Source. Field Survey, 2022
From the table above, majority of the respondents were satisfied with the service of water
supply (53.3%) while 5% of the respondents were very unsatisfied with the supply of water.
The results of this study were found to be nearly consistent with the study conducted by
(Kumasi et al., n.d.) who reported 64%, 41% and 57% user satisfaction of water supply in
Akatsi, East Gonja and Suyani West respectively. Therefore, from the results presented under
39
the availability and reliability of water sources, it is fair to say that, water supply within the
study areas is reliable and available to majority of residents.
4.10 Affordability of Water Within Study Area

Just like many concepts involving the use of money, affordability is subjective. Therefore, what
one might find to be affordable may not be the same for another. In order to have a universal
means of measuring affordability of water, several stakeholders in the WASH sector have
provided baseline thresholds. Both the user perception of affordability of water and the
provided threshold of 3% of the household’s income provided by the UN (United Nations,
n.d.) was used to evaluate the affordability of water within the study areas.
n= 120
100
88.3%
90
77.5%
80
% OF HOUSEHOLDS
70
60
50
40
30 22.5%
20 11.7%
10
0
NOT AFFORDABLE AFFORDABLE
AFFORDABILITY
UN THRESHOLD USER PERCEPTION
Figure 4. 4 UN threshold vrs user perception on affordability of water

The findings of this study showed that, 22.5% (n=27) of households spend more than 3% of
their household income on water while 77.5% (n=94) spend 3% and below. The figures
reported by this study are slightly above the figure of 76% of the Ghanaian population spending
5% or less of their total expenditure on WASH as reported by UNICEF (Abdurazakov, 2021).
Therefore, according to the UN threshold, 27 households within the study areas do not find the
prices of water to be affordable. However, considering the user perception, only 11.7% (n=14)
of households found the prices of water to be unaffordable. The 88.3% figure was also below
the 96% user perception on affordability as reported by (Kumasi et al., n.d.). Though there is a
40
difference of 13 households between the UN threshold and user perception of non-affordability,
both angles report the majority of households to find the prices of water affordable.
n= 120
1%
6%
21%
16%
56%
V. SATISFIED SATISFIED NEUTRAL UNSATISFIED V. UNSATISFIED
Figure 4. 5 Distribution of user satisfaction with the prices of water

From the cross comparison between the user perception and the UN threshold on affordability,
majority of households found the prices of water to be affordable. This gives an informed idea
as to why the results of the study also showed that, 56% (n=68) of the households were satisfied
with the prices of water. Only 1% of the households were very unsatisfied of the prices.
4.11 Consumer Perception of Water Quality

The quality of the water sources identified within the study areas were documented in detail in
the report. The details of the study show that, majority of the survey respondents perceive the
sources of drinking water to be of good quality (82.5% of the respondents or n=99) whereas
only a measly 15.8% (n=19) of the respondents perceive the water to be of poor quality. This
intuition stems from the presence of suspended particles observed by respondents in their
sources of water. The result tallies with the research conducted by both (Safoa et al., 2013) and
(Appiah-Effah et al., 2021) who also reported similar perceptions in the Oforikrom
municipality. Additionally, some respondents noted that their sources of water cannot be used
for all household activities, hence their stance on the source of water being of poor quality. A
portion of the respondents were however undecided/unsure or indifferent about the quality of
the water and were represented by 1.7% (n=2) of the total respondents interviewed. The results
41
of this study were once again consistent with data provided by (Appiah-Effah et al., 2021)
whose study also reported that, majority of the respondents within the Oforikrom municipal
perceived their preferred sources to be of good quality. The table below provides the summary
of respondents’ answers to the question “Is the drinking water of good quality?”.
Table 4. 8 Perception of drinking water quality among respondents

Perception of drinking water quality among respondents
Yes 99 82.5
Somehow 2 1.7
No 19 15.8
n= 120
90 82.5%
80
70
% OF RESPONDENTS
60
50
40
30
20 15.8%
10 1.7%
0
YES NO SOMEHOW
IS THE WATER OF GOOD QUALITY?
. Figure 4. 6 Distribution of respondents perception of the quality of water from their main
sources
42
n= 19
45 42.1%
40
% OF RESPONDANTS
35 31.6%
30
26.3%
25
20
15
10
5
0
Particles Present Taste Present Colour Present
REASON FOR ANSWER
Series 1
Figure 4. 7 Distribution of respondents who perceive their sources of water to be of poor

quality.
Respondents’ perception of their source of water being of poor quality saw a multifaceted array
of responses being provided. Figures a and b show where majority of respondents leaned
towards the aesthetic aspect of water to make judgements as to the quality of the water (82.5%
of respondents who perceived their source of water to be of good quality, 15.8% of respondents
perceived their source of water to be of poor quality and 1.7% who were indifferent or
undecided about the quality of their sources of water), thus, color, taste, odor and suspended
particles. This was cross cutting in all three instances and therefore, the results of this study
confirms the findings of (Egan et al., 2008) in respect to the importance of valuing water quality
as a function of water quality measures.
4.12 Treatment of Water

Majority of households perceived the water used for household purposes to be good quality
(82.5%). Perhaps, this explains why out of the 120 households visited, only 17 treat their water
in one way or the other. This represents only 14.2% of the total households and is established
to be far below the reported 57.6% of households involved in household water treatment in
Ghana by GLSS 7 (Ghana Statistical Service, 2019). It is however above the 22% (22 out of
100 households) reported by (Appiah-Effah et al., 2021) who also observed a very low number
of households practicing household water treatment.
43
n= 120
100
85.8%
% OF RESPONDENTS
80
60
40
20 14.2%
0
NO YES
DO YOU TREAT WATER BEFORE USE?
Series 1
Figure 4. 8 Distribution of water treatment practiced by households

4.14 Water Quality levels of the various water sources at Fiapre

The water quality analysis of the various water sources identified within the study area are
detailed in this part of the report. Survey details indicate that the majority of respondents
perceive their source of water to be a good quality. Which accounts for 82.5% (respondent; 99)
stating their source of ware to be of good quality, with only 15.8% (19 respondents) stating
otherwise and 1.7% (2 respondent) not sure of the quality. Biological and physicochemical test
which were conducted on the various water sources were consistent with (Appiah-effah et al.,
2021) whose study indicated though most respondent perceive their source of water to be of
good quality yet some water quality parameters of these sources fall below the GSA and WHO
standard.
4.14.1Biological Parameters
Biological parameters are important factors in determining the quality of drinking water. They
are more important than the physical and chemical parameters in terms of their direct impact
on human health.
The table below presents the total and faecal coliform counts of the various water sources in
Fiapre in relation to the World Health Organization Guideline for Drinking-water Quality. It
can be inferred that all water samples, Borehole (2,822,333.3±18541.0 CFU/100ml), Dug well
(1,339,543±13,321.1 CFU/100ml) and Ghana Water Company (21,444.4±119.9 CFU/100ml)
fall far above the WHO GDWQ threshold of 0 CFU/100ml for Total Coliform Count for
drinking water. Although the presence of coliform is not usually harmful since not all bacteria
cause disease, it indicates the possibility of disease causing bacteria from human and animal
faeces(AAndrews, E.). A positive overall coliform test was followed by a feacal coliform test.
This test will confirm the presence of pathogen(Ross & Parrott, 2001). The Faecal Coliform
test indicated that faecal coliforms were only isolated in Dug well samples (40.0±13.0 CFU/100
ml).
44
Table 4. 9 Biological Parameters of the various water sources at Fiapre
Water Source
WHO
Parameter Ghana Water
Bore Hole Dug Well GDWQ
Company
0
Total Coliform Count
41.0 1.1 9 CFU/100m
(CFU/100ml)
l
0
Faecal Coliform Count
None 40.0±13.0 None CFU/100m
(CFU/100ml)
l
Data is presented as mean ± standard error of the mean. CFU/100ml: Coliform forming unit
per 100 millilitres of water sample, WHO GDWQ: World Health Organization Guideline for
Drinking-water Quality.
4.14.2 Physico-Chemical Parameters

The table below presents the physico-chemical parameters of the various water sources in
Fiapre in relation to the World Health Organization Guideline for Drinking-water Quality. All
the water sources, Borehole, dug well, and Ghana Water Company measured
Conductivity(µS/cm), Temperature(oC), Turbidity (NTU) and Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L)
within the WHO GDWQ accepted levels, but the pH levels of the Borehole (5.9±0.2) and Dug
Well (5.6±0.2) were slightly acidic. Hence were below the WHO GDWQ recommended lower
level of 6.5.
Most Physico-Chemical Parameters except pH tested for the various sources of water within
the study area where up to the standard of WHO which is consistent with questionnaire data
on respondent perception on water quality. The low pH of Bore hole and dug well is not
startling due to oxygen reacting with concentrations of dissolved iron in the infiltrate water.
This parameter is coherent with (Appiah-effah et al., 2021) study results which showed that
all groundwater sources were acidic with pH below 6.5 and the highest being 6.19. this also
prove as a reason for 5% respondent stating that there is taste in the water sometimes.
Table 4. 10 Physico-Chemical Parameters of the various water sources at Fiapre

Water Source
WHO
Parameter Ghana Water
Bore Hole Dug Well GDWQ
Company
< 2500
Conductivity(µS/cm) 28.456±2.221 51.889±7.096 19.9±0.3
µS/cm
o
Temperature( C) 29.111±0.274 28.167±0.118 28.3±0.3 15-34
Total Dissolved Solids <1000
131.0±11.3 239.3±35.2 92.7±1.5
(mg/L) mg/L
Ph 5.9±0.2 5.6±0.2 6.8±0.1 6.5-8.5
Turbidity (NTU) 3.2±0.1 4.1±0.2 1.8±0.1 <5
Data is presented as mean ± standard error of the mean. mg/L: Milligram per Litre, ml:
Milliliters, WHO GDWQ: World Health Organization Guideline for Drinking-water Quality.
45
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 CONCLUSION
▪ The findings of this research showed that, majority of households (n=72) relied on
boreholes for water to carry out household activities like cooking and bathing. Reliance
on sachet water or bottled water was however found to be the most patronized source
of water for drinking (n=89). Majority of households (n=87) were also found to use
between 100-299 liters of water per day. It was also established that, all households met
the minimum stipulated requirement of water usage by the WHO as no household was
recorded to use less than 20 liters of water.
▪ The study also showed that, the accessibility, availability and reliability of water
services recorded satisfactory results. This is clearly seen in the case of availability and
reliability of water sources within the communities where 73% of respondents had
water flowing for 24 hours on days it flowed. In addition, 68% of respondents also have
access to water on all days of the week. In the mix of all the uncertainties surrounding
water supply in several communities across Ghana, it can be safely concluded that
majority of households within Fiapre are satisfied with the current state of water supply
and its related service levels.
▪ The affordability of water services was also found to be highly regarded with 88.3%
(n=106) of households stating they found the prices of water to be affordable. An
additional 56% (n=67) households also confessed to being satisfied with the current
prices of water of water services as well.
▪ The user perception of water quality was found to be regarded in high esteem. This is
evident from the results that, 99 households out of 120 perceived their water to be of
good quality. This in turn led to fewer households practicing household treatment of
water. Only 17 (14.2%) of households practiced household water treatment of any form.
▪ Water was also collected from various sources in the study area to test the water quality
levels based on the physicochemical and bacteriological parameter. The results indicate
that, most of the physicochemical quality parameters of the water sources in Fiapre
were within the WHO limits for drinking water except for the pH which make the dug
well (5.6±0.2) and borehole (5.9±0.2) water a little acidic. This could be as a result of
the shallow nature of the well and oxygen reacting with concentrations of dissolved
iron in the infiltrate water. The bacteriological parameter also indicated that the total
46
coliform acceptable count (0 CFU/100ml) was exceeded in all the source, but faecal
coliform could be only identified in the dug well source. The presents of the faecal
coliform in the dug wells is attributed to direct contact with humans and animals’ waste
and the shallow nature and nearness of the water source to place of convenience. The
high levels of faecal coliform pose serious challenges to water resource management
and could seriously affect public health and the socio- economic effect of ingesting
coliform-infested water would be disastrous (Cobbina et al., 2009).
5.2 RECOMMENDATION
1. Public utilities service providers like GWCL also need to do more to improve their
coverage within Fiapre community. This would help fast-track Ghana’s bid to fulfil her
commitment to the SDGs, especially SDG number 6, which focuses on the WASH
sector.
2. Though majority of respondents found the prices of water to be affordable, more effort
has to put in to subsidize the prices of water for households who aren’t able to afford
the current prices. More communal standpipes and boreholes should also be constructed
within the communities to further improve the accessibility of water within the study
areas.
3. More work however needs to be done to educate households within the Fiapre
community on the benefits of household treatment of water. This is especially of utmost
importance when the water is to be ingested.
4. The Sunyani West municipal assembly should make sure residents do not sink wells
near or closer to places of convenience so as not to cause contamination of wells with
faecal matter as they may be leached into the wells.
5. There is the need to increase the effectiveness of existing legislation by making use of
a community participatory model. Since the chiefs are close to the people and have
significant control over the actions of individuals within their jurisdiction, collaborative
enforcement of environmental regulations should be promoted between the district
assembly and the local authorities.
47
REFERENCES
2015 Update and MDG Assessment. (2015).
Adabor, E. (2012). CLIMATE CHANGE AND CITY DWELLERS ADAPTIVE CAPACITY:

THE CASE OF FLOODING IN THE KUMASI METROPOLIS. 66, 37–39.
AMCOW. (2015). AMCOW CSO - Water Supply and Sanitation in Ghana.
Anupam. (2020). Understanding the 5 Water Sources – Know your Water. 23/12/2020.
Appiah-Effah, E., Nketiah, E., Duku, G. A., & Nyarko, K. B. (2021). Domestic drinking
water management : Quality assessment in Oforikrom municipality , Ghana. 104(3), 1–
26. https://doi.org/10.1177/00368504211035997
Boadi, S., Nsor, C. A., Antobre, O. O., & Acquah, E. (2016). An analysis of illegal mining on
the Offin shelterbelt forest reserve, Ghana: Implications on community livelihood.
Journal of Sustainable Mining, 15(3), 115–119.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JSM.2016.12.001
Cairncross, S., & Valdmanis, V. (2006). Chapter 41. Water Supply, Sanitation, and Hygiene
Promotion. Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries (2nd Edition), 771–792.
https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-6179-5/chpt-41
Change, N. C. (2014). Effects of Tropical Deforestation on Climate and Agriculture.
Chew, J. F., Corlin, L., Ona, F., Pinto, S., Fenyi-baah, E., Osei, B. G., & Gute, D. M. (2019).
Water Source Preferences and Water Quality Perceptions among Women in the Eastern
Region , Ghana : A Grounded Theory Study. 1–13.
CLIMATES TO TRAVEL. (n.d.). Ghana climate: average weather, temperature,

precipitation, when to go.
CWSA. (2018). Annual Report CWSA. Ministry of Water and Sanitation, 53(9), 1689–1699.
Duncan, A. E. (2020). The Dangerous Couple: Illegal Mining and Water Pollution-A Case
Study in Fena River in the Ashanti Region of Ghana.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2378560
Esrey, S. A., Potash, J. B., Roberts, L., & Shiff, C. (1991). Effects of improved water supply
and sanitation on ascariasis, diarrhoea, dracunculiasis, hookworm infection,
schistosomiasis, and trachoma. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 69(5), 609–
48
621.
Frone, S., & Frone, D. F. (2013). Scientific Papers Series Management , Economic
Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development PROMOTING ACCESS TO WATER
SUPPLY AND PROMOTING ACCESS TO WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION :
ISSUES AND CHALLENGES IN ROMANIA. June.
https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2201.4404
Ghana Statistical Service. (2012). 2010 Population and Housing Census Final Results Ghana
Statistical Service. 1–11.
Ghana Statistical Service. (2014). Kumasi Metropolitan. 1–2.
Ghana Web. (2018). Ghana may import water from 2030 - Lands Minister. 20/01/2018.
Hein, L., van Koppen, K., de Groot, R. S., & van Ierland, E. C. (2006). Spatial scales,
stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics, 57(2),
209–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.005
Howard Guy, & Bartram Jamie. (2003). Domestic Water Quantity, Service Level and Health.
World Health Organization, 38.
IRC. (2014). Monitoring service levels :: IRC. 11/03/2014.
JMP. (n.d.). Drinking water | JMP.
Jones, H., Parker, K., & Reed, R. (2002). Water Supply and Sanitation Access and Use by
Physically Disabled People: e-conference Synthesis Report. September.
Kaushik, A. (2011). Literature Review on Right to Water for Livelihoods. 1–14.
Ki-moon, B. (2015). The Human Right to Water. April 2011, 1–8.
Lutz, A., Minyila, S., Saga, B., Diarra, S., Apambire, B., & Thomas, J. (2015). Fluctuation of
groundwater levels and recharge patterns in Northern Ghana. Climate, 3(1), 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.3390/cli3010001
Monney, I., & Antwi-Agyei, P. (2018). Beyond the MDG water target to universal water
coverage in Ghana: the key transformative shifts required. Journal of Water, Sanitation
and Hygiene for Development, 8(2), 127–141.
https://doi.org/10.2166/WASHDEV.2018.176
49
Mythrey, R. C., Ramachandra, N., & Shreevathsa. (2012). Water: The elixir of life.
International Journal of Research in Ayurveda and Pharmacy, 3(6), 769–771.
https://doi.org/10.7897/2277-4343.03613
NRDC. (n.d.). Fracking 101 | NRDC.
Obiri-Danso, K. S., Adjei, B., Stanley, K., & Jones, K. (2002). Microbiological quality and
metal levels in wells and borehole water in some peri-urban communities in Kumasi,
Ghana. Science And Technology, 3(1), 059–066. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJEST08.126
Owusu, K., Waylen, P., & Qiu, Y. (2008). Changing rainfall inputs in the Volta basin:
Implications for water sharing in Ghana. GeoJournal, 71(4), 201–210.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-008-9156-6
Peprah, C., Oduro-Ofori, E., & Asante-Wusu, I. (2015). Analysis of Accessibility to Water
Supply and Sanitation Services in the Awutu-Senya East Municipality, Ghana. Journal
of Sustainable Development, 8(8), 310–325. https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v8n8p310
Pure-H2O. (n.d.). 3.2. Physical and Chemical Quality of Water - Page 2.
Rio Carrillo, A. M., & Frei, C. (2009). Water: A key resource in energy production. Energy
Policy, 37(11), 4303–4312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.05.074
Rydhagen, B., & Universitet, L. (2007). Water management and health in Ghana ; Case
study -Kumasi Master of science Thesis , Environmental Science Programme 2007 ,
Supervisor :
Salifu, O., Oladejo, N. K., & Adetunde, I. A. (2013). Gold Production and the Ghanaian
Economic Performance. 2(1), 26–47.
UNICEF. (2019). Water | UNICEF Ghana. 2019.
United Nations. (n.d.). Water | United Nations.
United Nations Millennium Development Goals. (n.d.).
Water & Wastes Digest. (n.d.). Municipal Water | WWD.
Water Technology. (n.d.). Accra Sea Water Desalination Plant - Water Technology.
WaterAid. (2012). Rights-based approaches to increasing access to water and sanitation.

Social Science and Medicine, 7(21), 282.
50
Woodhouse, M. (2004). Realizing the right to water. Waterlines, 23(1), 22–23.
https://doi.org/10.3362/0262-8104.2004.037
-Nathanson, J. A., 2000," Basic Environmental Technology", Prentic-Hall, Inc.. (
Nathanson, 2000)
APHA. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 21st ed.
Washington, DC: American Public Health Association; 2005
Davis ML. Water and Wastewater Engineering—Design Principles and Practice.
New York: McGraw-Hill; 2010
Abbas SH, Ismail IM, Mostafa TM, Sulaymon AH. Biosorption of heavy metals: A
review. Journal of Chemical Science and Technology. 2014;3:74-102
Tomar M. Quality Assessment of Water and Wastewater. Boca Raton: CRC Press;
1999
Tchobanoglous G, Burton FL, Stensel HD. Metcalf & Eddy Wastewater Engineering:
Treatment and Reuse. 4th ed. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Limited; 2003
Spellman FR. The Drinking Water Handbook. 3rd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2017
Hammer MJ. Water and Wastewater Technology. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River:
Pearson education; 2011
Alley ER. Water Quality Control Handbook. Vol. 2. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2007
Chatterjee A. Water Supply Waste Disposal and Environmental Pollution
Engineering (Including Odour, Noise and Air Pollution and its Control). 7th ed.
Delhi: Khanna Publishers; 2001
McGhee TJ, Steel EW. Water Supply and Sewerage. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1991
Nathanson JA. Basic Environmental Technology: Water Supply. New Delhi: Printice-
Hall of India; 2004
Vacs Renwick, Deborah. 2013. “The Effects of an Intermittent Piped Water Network and
51
Storage Practices On Household Water Quality in Tamale, Ghana”. Cambridge, MA:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Taruna J. and Alankrita C. (2013) Assessment of water quality and its effects on the health of
residents of Jhunjhunu district, Rajasthan: A cross sectional study Journal of public
health and epidemiology, vol 5(4), pp189-191.
WHO, (2009)? Global health risks: mortality and burden of disease attributable to selected
major risks. Geneva, World Health Organization (accessed 16th December 2016).
Campanella B, Onor M, D’Ulivo A, Giannecchini R, D’Orazio M, Petrini R, et al.
Human exposure to thallium through tap water: A study from Valdicastello Carducci
and Pietrasanta (northern Tuscany, Italy). Science of the Total Environment.
2016;548:33-42
52
53

Project Full-Sena - Final Work.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Full-Sena - Final Work.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY OF ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCE

CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

“ASSESSMENT OF WATER SERVICE LEVELS IN FIAPRE SUNYANI

A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Award of

BsC. Civil Engineering in School of Engineering

University of Energy and Natural Resources

Approved: Department of Civil Enginerring

Ing. Dr. Prince Antwi-Agyei …………………… ………………….

(Supervisor) Signature Date

Ing. Dr. Prince Antwi-Agyei …………………… ………………….

(Head of Department) Signature Date

University of Energy and Natural Resources

All rights reserved

SUFYAN ABDUL-LATIF SENA ……………………… 20/10/2022

YAKUBU RAZAK ………………………. 20/10/2022

Table 4. 1 Age of respondents .............................................................................................................. 30

Figure 2. 1 Illustration of a municipal water supply system ................................................................... 6

Figure 3. 1 Study Area .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

1.2 Problem Statement

1.3 Research Question

▪ Why do users patronize their preferred source of water?

1.4 Aims and Objectives

2.2 Uses of Water

2.3 Sources of Water

Figure 2. 1 Illustration of a municipal water supply system

Source. Hudson Valley Water Resources Inc, 2008

Figure 2. 2 Illustration of ground water

Source. Byju’s 2021

Source. gna.org, Ghana, 2021

2.4 Quality of Water

2.5.1.2 Turbidity and Suspended Particles

2.5.2 Chemical Parameters

2.5.2.6 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)

The two types of hardness are:

• Temporary hardness which is due to carbonates and bicarbonates can be removed by

2.5.3 Microbial Parameters

2.6 Water Quality Parameters Analysis

2.6.3 Electrical Conductivity Analysis

2.6.4 Turbidity Analysis

2.6.5 Coliforms Analysis

coliforms per 100 mL = number of colonies × 100/mL of sample.

2.7 Parameters and their Ghana Standards by GWCL.

pH 6.5 – 9 Taste alteration

Total Dissolved Solid 1000mg/L Scale formation

Temperature - Enhance pollution

Turbidity < 5 NTU Interferes with disinfection

Conductivity 0.005 – 0.05 S/m; Gastro-intestinal irritation

Colour 15 TCU Aesthetical unpleasing

E coli 0 count in 100m.L sample Gastroenteric disease

Total Coliform 0 count in 100m.L sample Indicate gastroenteric pathogens

Source. Vacs, 2013.

2.8 Accessibility to Water

Table 2. 2 Drinking water ladder from JMP

2.9 Availability of Water

2.10 Climate Change

2.11 Illegal Mining

Figure 2. 5 Effect of Illegal Mining in the Birim River.

2.12 Seasons of the Year

2.14 Quantity of Water

2.15 Affordability of Water

Figure 3. 1 Study Area

Figure 3. 2 Study area showing households visited

Source. Map generated from KoboCollect Toolbox. Points of questionnaires administered.