Population Distribution. The pie charts for the population distribution data illustrate the following distribution information based on the different sized buffer index created in this study. The main difference between these charts was that Dera woreda is less densely populated than the other two woredas, meaning there was a higher percentage of people living in rural areas. In terms of water point costs, it would make logical sense that based on these charts Farta would be the less-expensive woreda to fulfill water coverage as it had a highest score for “small town”. However, this was not the case. The mid-range score of 44% for North Mecha made a greater difference in terms of cost and made the overall costs significantly lower. In this woreda the houses overall were closer together across the whole area and North Mecha has a higher population than the other two woredas due to of sharing of water points that caused the costs to drop considerably. Dera Population Distribution 17% 52% 31% small town village cluster remote/sparse households Chart 1 N Mecha Population Distribution 14% 42% 44% small town village cluster remote/sparse households Chart 2 Farta Population Distribution 45% 27% 28% small town village cluster remote/sparse households Costing predictions Table 4 shows the initial capital investments based on the technology level. For instance, among the Basic level, the costs per head ranged from $1.54 (USD) to $30.15 and the total costs for one facility was $86.59 for self-supply and $1,230 for CWS. These were considerably less than the Advanced category, which had $268.63 cost per head and $1,370 for one structure. Table 5 indicates the total calculated cost for each woreda needed by 2030. For example, with scenario 1 it would cost 24 million for Dera, 11 million for Mecha, and 14 million to supply Farta. The difference in costs are an indication of the distance between homes, based on the population distribution calculation. The scenarios that included piped supply were the highest costs, because of the lack of sharing between households with this system and the higher initial investment capital requirements. For instance, it would cost an estimated 27 billion dollars to install a piped system in every home in the Dera woreda by 2030. The woreda North Mecha had the lowest estimated costs needed to reach every person with a water source. The lower costs were due to household being placed closer together than the other woredas. In terms of the lowest cost scenario to reac...
Population Distribution. The findings from this study provide information on how self-supply can achieve the SDGs through sharing of water points. In Ethiopia, approximately 61 million people lack access to basic water, and in rural areas some Ethiopians are walking more than 3 hours from their homes to collect unsafe water from open sources, such as streams and hand dug xxxxx (Xxxxx.xxx, 2017). Self-supply offers the possibility for services that are financially in-reach for most families in this area. The results from this study show that approximately 8 households can share a water point. Through self-supply, several households can invest in a shared water point making this a very cost-efficient water delivery method. Another finding from this study was that North Mecha is the most densely populated woreda out of the three considered in this project. This means that North Mecha had the highest number of homes that shared a water source out of the three. This information could be used to further study appropriate methods to improve water service delivery for this region. Model Improvement We found that the most cost-effective option was the third scenario: using 50% piped supply, 20% self-supply, and 30% CWS. Our results suggest that a low-level of self-supply can be used to supplement already existing water service delivery options. The ability to avoid building all new structures is what makes this option the most feasible and sustainable. There is need for further development on the model used in this study. Potentially this model could be used in the future as a planning tool for communities to understand funding requirements necessary to reach their country’s safe water goals. Key improvements to the model would include: making the direct costs for self-supply more accurate, including inflation into the model, and adding more detailed cost breakdown of the different water facility types. Assumptions & Limitations There were several assumptions that had to be made during the methods process to derive the cost calculations. The first was that according to a survey done by CSA and The World Bank, the average household size in rural Ethiopia is 5.1, so this was the number used to estimate the number of people that lived in each house. This information allowed for an estimation of not just households per buffer (circle), but the approximate number of people that lived in each region. Based on this calculation it was assumed there were 1,000 people per buffer.
Population Distribution. The industrial park in San Luis, Arizona is located just to the east of the port of entry. Traffic to or from the industrial park to the border crossing does not pass through areas of dense population. However, there are population centers located to the north and northeast of the industrial park. Because the dominant winds of the area blow south, it is likely that an airborne release from a facility in the industrial park would disperse southward into Mexico. The area of San Xxxx Río Colorado, Sonora located south of the industrial park is largely residential and commercial. The area just north of the port of entry along Main Street (Highway 95) in San Luis, Arizona is commercial. Highway 95 runs north from the port of entry to Yuma, passing several schools, a senior center, and the local health clinic. Vehicles heading from the industrial park or from Mexico to Yuma pass these areas of sensitive populations. North of the schools along Highway 95 is another residential area.
Population Distribution. Average population density in San Xxxx Río Colorado is 30 persons per square kilometer with an annual growth rate of 4.34%. Because the main industrial park in San Xxxx Río Colorado is located on the eastern edge of the city, there are fewer chances that a serious accident will affect large numbers of people. Additionally, the dominant winds in the area blow from the north, away from populated areas. The “10 de Abril” neighborhood is the closest population center to the industrial park. This appears to be an area of high population density. One preschool is located very close to the industrial park. Several other schools are found along or near major transportation routes in the city. Additionally, because many of the maquiladoras in San Xxxx Río Colorado are located outside of the industrial park, risks to the population are spread throughout the city. One preparatory school and one university are located within the industrial park itself.
Population Distribution. Naco, Sonora is a predominately residential community. The main industrial area is located in the south of the city. There are 124 commercial businesses located throughout the city.
Population Distribution. Naco, Arizona is a predominately residential community with a few small businesses near the Port of Entry.
Population Distribution. Mexicali Land use is predominately low-density residential. Pockets of commercial areas are distributed throughout the city. Medium-to-high-density residential areas are located adjacent to the international border and on the northwest side of the city. Industrial areas are located on the east side of the city (Map 5).
Population Distribution. The project study area consists of a section of the population whose land has been acquired for SEZ. Due to decrease of agricultural activity in recent past people work as daily wageand contractual labours to carve out their livelihood. Fishermen community exists in the study area villages who live on a daily earn and spent life style. Table 3-23: Demographic Status of the Study Area S. No District Sub- distt Name Distance In km No. of Household (2001) Population (2001) No. of Household (2011) Population (2011) 1 Bharuch Vagra Vadadla 0-3 142 606 201 822 2 Bharuch Vagra Vav 0-3 133 676 155 727 3 Bharuch Vagra Kadodara 0-3 353 1,811 420 1,995 4 Bharuch Vagra Sambheti 0-3 67 391 82 416 5 Bharuch Vagra Samatpor 0-3 69 332 79 367 6 Bharuch Xxxxx Xxxxxxx 0-3 95 513 120 611 7 Bharuch Vagra Jolva 0-3 171 814 338 1,442 Total 1,030 5143 1,395 6,380 8 Bharuch Vagra Padariya 3-5 131 569 131 647 9 Bharuch Vagra Janiadara 3-5 129 621 150 729 10 Bharuch Vagra Rahiad 3-5 269 1,315 355 1,694 Total 529 2,505 636 3,070 11 Bharuch Vagra Paniadara 5-7 460 2,330 514 2,563 12 Bharuch Vagra Narnavi 5-7 131 596 151 692 13 Bharuch Vagra Akhod 5-7 000 000 000 831 14 Bharuch Vagra Atali 5-7 215 1145 239 1150 00 Xxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx 0-0 120 535 152 676 16 Bharuch Vagra Suva 5-7 325 1664 413 1920 00 Xxxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxxx 5-7 1,551 6,846 3,426 13,495 Total 2,935 13,785 5,069 21,327 18 Bharuch Xxxxx Xxxxxx 7-10 148 730 166 830 19 Bharuch Vagra Goladara 7-10 191 939 201 890 20 Bharuch Vagra Nadarkha 7-10 79 417 92 447 21 Bharuch Vagra Vengani 7-10 150 675 202 908 22 Bharuch Vagra Ambheta 7-10 293 1330 347 1552 23 Bharuch Vagra Jageshwar 7-10 346 1465 383 1571 24 Bharuch Vagra Nandida 7-10 153 683 160 719 S. No District Sub- distt Name Distance In km No. of Household (2001) Population (2001) No. of Household (2011) Population (2011) Total 1,360 6,239 1,551 6,917 Over all Total 5,854 27,672 8,651 37,694 Source: Primary Census Abstract 2001 & 2011 From the above table it can be inferred that the there has been an increase of 36% in the population since the last decade. Dahej village approximately had the share of 25% and 35% of the total population in 2001 and 2011 respectively. Hence, any changes in its demography profile is deemed to effect the demographic profile of the whole area. The bulk increase can be seen in the Dahej Village where the population just got doubled in 2011. The average household size in 2001 and 2011 are approximately 5 and 4 respectively. The population has got increa...
Population Distribution. Foremost in any disaster risk reduction programme is the protection of lives of the population from devastating effects and impacts of hazards. Nobody wants more than zero in its target for lost lives due to hazard. It is then important to understand where the people are in relation to various hazards. The distribution of the population is presented in Figure 5 which demonstrates how the population is distributed across 14 barangays of the municipality. Obviously, accessible areas are inhabited by the population the most. Where road networks are built, residential areas are developed as well as livelihood sources also change. Coastal plains and flat land are occupied mainly by the migrants while mountainous areas are generally inhabited by indigenous peoples. However, there has been an increasing movement of non indigenous peoples into the forest areas that poses threat to the ecosystem as well as to the ancestral domain of the tribes. Houses are generally made of light materials although there is already an observable increasing number of houses built using so-called good lumber to semi concrete materials. Figure 5 - Social Map
