Skip to main content

Table 3 Scores for the economic sustainability dimension

From: Sustainability assessment of a micro hydropower plant in Nepal

Themes Dimensional weighting (%) Code Indicators Score Notes on scoring Theme score
Investment 25 ECO1 Loan % of funding 5 No loan 4.43
ECO2 Grant % of funding 5 Completely funded by a governmental organization (AEPC)
ECO3 Payback period 4 Planned period of 6 years relatively short, but has not been reached completely due to delay in construction and HH connection
ECO4 Life cycle costs 0 Unable to score
ECO5 Repair and maintenance costs 4 Not very high
Community contribution 10 ECO6 Villager’s monetary contribution 3 Main usual monthly electricity charges 4.00
ECO7 Work on MHP activities (sweat equity) 5 Sweat work during construction, now for canal cleaning
Employee remuneration 5 ECO8 Official salary agreement (operator) 3 Contractual agreement 3.50
ECO9 Salary levels of employees/operator of MHP (absolute numbers) 4 Operator is satisfied
Electricity tariff 15 ECO10 Tariff collection pattern 3 Satisfying 3.4
ECO11 Monthly tariff collection 3 Satisfying
ECO12 Tariff for domestic use 3 Satisfying, separate tariff for HH and business use
ECO13 Tariff for commercial use 3 Satisfying, separate tariff for HH and business use
ECO14 Collection of tariffs that keep pace with inflation 5 Well adjusted (raised basic tariff from 60 to 80 NRs)
Project benefits 35 ECO15 General income increase per household 3 Satisfying 3.42
ECO16 Employment opportunity 3 Satisfying (e.g., carpentry)
ECO17 No. of new income-generating activities 5 Plenty of new income-generating activities
ECO18 Time saved from collecting firewood and wheat grinding 5 Average savings of 4 h/day, independent from collecting fire wood, e.g., due to rice cooker
ECO19 Competitiveness of the local community concerning electricity 0 Unable to score
ECO20 Sustainable end use of electricity 5 A relatively long list of sustainable end use of electricity
ECO21 Mechanism for sale of electricity to national grid 1 No policy mechanism, no sale in place
ECO22 No. of local energy suppliers 2 One energy supplier (NEA)
ECO23 Revenue/benefits of the local supplier 1 No notable increase in benefits (officially NEA as a whole operating at losses)
ECO24 Change in no. of local enterprises 5 Significant improvements, e.g., carpenter, miller, poultry farms
ECO25 Revenue/benefits of the local enterprises 1 Main family enterprises which are producing many home necessities
ECO26 Water allocation 2 Only little water used, due to small MHP
Entrepreneurial potential 10 ECO27 Openness to new experience 5 Existing ideas on using electricity for business: mustard mill, off-season vegetable farming (with irrigation), dairy farming (storing of milk), welding, tailoring, knitting, and handicraft for trade 3.50
ECO28 Conscientiousness 2 For 26.6%, the risk of failure would be too high for a realization of the ideas. Villager’s consciousness is affected by a lack of awareness of opportunities due to low education—government initiatives needed
Aggregated score—economic dimension 3.74