Submit to Water Review for Water Propose a Special Issue

Journal Browser

Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development

Print Special Issue Flyer
Special Issue Editors
Special Issue Information
Keywords
Published Papers

A special issue of Water (ISSN 2073-4441). This special issue belongs to the section "Water Resources Management, Policy and Governance".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 September 2018) | Viewed by 92114

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Dr. Agustí Pérez-Foguet

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Engineering Sciences and Global Development Research Group, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Civil Engineering School of Barcelona, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya. c/Jordi Girona 1-3, C2-310, E-08034 Barcelona, Spain
Interests: sustainable development; water resources management; multivariate statistics; muticriteria decision-making; non-linear mathematical programming; uncertainty; social choice

Dr. Ricard Giné-Garriga

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Programme Manager, Department of Water and Sanitation, Stockholm International Water Institute, Linnégatan 87A, 100 55 Stockholm, Sweden
Interests: water governance; sustainable WASH services; monitoring and evaluation; human rights to water and sanitation
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Dr. Alejandro Jiménez Fernández de Palencia

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Stockholm International Water Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
Interests: water governance, human rights, sustainable water and sanitation services, resilience
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Prof. Anna Tengberg

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Adjunct Professor at Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies, Box 170, SE-22100 Lund, Sweden
Interests: water resources management; water governance; integrated natural resources management (INRM); ecosystem-based management; monitoring and evaluation

PhD. Daniel Camós

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Senior Infrastructure Economist. The World Bank, Water Global Practice, Middle East & North Africa Region
Interests: network utilities; regulation; benchmarking utilities; private sector participation in infrastructure; infrastructures and growth

PhD. Luis Alberto Andrés

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

The World Bank, Washington, D.C., Water Global Practice
Interests: impact evaluations; regulation; private sector participation in infrastructure water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH); microeconometrics

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

This Special Issue on “Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development” invites papers that report on recent developments in monitoring and modelling of water services and resources, sanitation services—including collection and treatment of wastewater and faecal sludge—and hygiene, and associated institutional arrangements, within the framework of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and particularly related to the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 aiming to “ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all” (SDG6) with linkages to several other SDGs, such as SDGs 11, 13, 14 and 15.

Safe drinking water and adequate sanitation and hygiene are pillars of human health and well-being. Water is also needed for food production, energy generation and industrial processes and goods, uses that are highly inter-connected and potentially conflicting. Non-safely managed wastewater put at risk healthy ecosystems, crucial to ensure quantity and quality of freshwater, and to maintain resilience to climate change. Integrated water resources management is essential to harness synergies as well as to manage potential trade-offs, to ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. The 8 targets and 11 indicators defining SDG6 cover all these dimensions, and the so called means of implementation (expand international cooperation and capacity-building, and support and strengthen the participation of local communities).

This Special Issue will include innovative case studies focusing on different regions and geographical scales, as well as the participation of different actors (public, utilities, providers, non-governmental). We look for innovations in the measurement of the SDG6 goal and targets at national and international levels, as well as local illustrative experiences that could be scaled-up or even influence future refinements of “Monitoring Water and Sanitation for Sustainable Development” from a Sustainable Development Goals perspective.

We welcome theoretical and applied analyses about monitoring of SDG6, procedures and indicators, as well as field studies and lessons learnt from actual monitoring experiences. We invite you to submit papers that involve innovative methods to deal with the analysis of multiple geographical scales, missing data, disaggregated comparative analyses, relationships and models linking SDG6 indicators and technological, economic and socio- environmental variables. We are particularly open to contributions that demonstrate novel developments and applications in any step of the data management cycle (data collection, pre-process, modelling and inference, post-process/visualization, analysis, decision-making), specifically at national and local scales.

Prof. Eng. Agustí Pérez-Foguet
PhD. Eng. Ricard Giné Garriga
PhD. Eng. Alejandro Jiménez Fernández de Palencia
Prof. Anna Tengberg
PhD. Daniel Camós
PhD. Luis Alberto Andrés
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Water is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

Sustainable Development Goals
Sustainable Development Indicators
Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
Water 4.0
Data collection, management and analysis
Statistical modelling
Econometric modelling
Support information systems
Performance and benchmarking

Published Papers (13 papers)

Download All Papers

Research

Jump to: Review

21 pages, 936 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Enabling Environment for Participation in Water and Sanitation: A Conceptual Framework

by Alejandro Jiménez, Hélène LeDeunff, Ricard Giné, Johanna Sjödin, Ryan Cronk, Sofia Murad, Marina Takane and Jamie Bartram

Water 2019, 11(2), 308; https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020308 - 12 Feb 2019

Cited by 43 | Viewed by 9000

Abstract

Participatory approaches are an important component of institutional frameworks for the governance of water resources and services. Studies on public participation in water management provide evidence for the outcomes of public participation and insights into the types of methods and the contexts under which participation can be meaningful. However, participatory processes are complex, and there is no single method by which to interpret, approach and implement them. This paper explores elements from the theory and practice of participation, applied to the management of water resources and water and sanitation services. Based on an in-depth literature review, we analyze the forms of participation in water and sanitation, their outcomes, as well as the contextual factors and procedural elements of participatory processes that affect their success. Contextual factors are those that are largely outside of the control of agencies or participants (e.g., demographics, history, and culture) or those that can only be influenced by management and institutional decisions in the mid- and long-term (e.g., the legal and institutional framework); while procedural elements are those over which agencies and participants have considerable control when designing and executing participatory efforts (e.g., representativeness and inclusivity, access to information, and opportunity to influence). We propose a framework that interrelates and integrates both contextual factors and procedural elements of participation. It, includes three additional aspects that are influenced by, and in turn influence, the context and the process: existing capacities for implementation of meaningful participatory processes, the resources that are allocated to them, and attitudes towards participatory processes. The framework helps conceptualize what we call the enabling environment for active, free, and meaningful participation in the delivery of water and sanitation services. By breaking down the complexities of participation, the framework supports practitioners and decision-makers to better design and implement participatory processes in water resources and water and sanitation services. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 2241 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Water Demand Framework and Water Development: The Case of China

by Yahua Wang, Tingting Wan and Cecilia Tortajada

Water 2018, 10(12), 1860; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10121860 - 14 Dec 2018

Cited by 8 | Viewed by 4490

Abstract

Water resources management is increasingly important for sustainable economic and social development. A coherent division of the development stages is of primary importance for selecting and implementing related water resource management strategies. Using evolving supply–demand relationships, this paper proposes a framework that considers water development stages to present a series of dynamic relationships between water demand changes and overall economic development. The framework is applied to China to advance the understanding of how demand evolves at different stages of water resources development under specific socioeconomic circumstances, and of strategic choices in general. The case of China explains how water resources management has gradually improved during distinct socioeconomic development stages. It illustrates the varieties and effectiveness of water policies made to adapt to changing demand over the course of socioeconomic development. The framework can be potentially applied to other countries or regions to identify the development stage in order to select proper water management strategies. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 2215 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

Monitoring Water Resources Governance Progress Globally: Experiences from Monitoring SDG Indicator 6.5.1 on Integrated Water Resources Management Implementation

by Maija Bertule, Paul Glennie, Peter Koefoed Bjørnsen, Gareth James Lloyd, Marianne Kjellen, James Dalton, Alistair Rieu-Clarke, Oriana Romano, Håkan Tropp, Joshua Newton and Joakim Harlin

Water 2018, 10(12), 1744; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10121744 - 27 Nov 2018

Cited by 25 | Viewed by 9510

Abstract

Improved water resources governance supports important social, economic, and environmental objectives. The 2030 Agenda recognizes improved water governance to be critical for achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and commits to monitor the progress of implementation of integrated water resources management (IWRM). This paper critically reviews the approach to monitoring SDG indicator 6.5.1 on implementation of IWRM. Firstly, the paper places the indicator monitoring within the context of other initiatives to measure water governance. Secondly, it analyzes experiences of application of the SDG indicator 6.5.1 methodology to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the indicator and presents the key findings of the 2017/2018 global baseline assessment of IWRM implementation. Baseline reporting shows that degree of IWRM implementation globally is 49%, though country scores range from 10 to 100%. Disaggregating the data by country and by aspect of water resources governance provides a diagnostic tool to identify areas of high and low progress, and, therefore, where increased resources and attention are required. The article concludes by suggesting how the next iteration of SDG indicator 6.5.1 monitoring cycle can be made into a tool for advancing the IWRM implementation and improved governance practices on the ground. It also proposes how the methodology can be strengthened to address current limitations, including aspects relating to integrity, accountability and transparency. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 2706 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Moving Up the Ladder: Assessing Sanitation Progress through a Total Service Gap

by Stuart Kempster and Andrés Hueso

Water 2018, 10(12), 1735; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10121735 - 26 Nov 2018

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 4444

Abstract

The Sustainable Development Goals create ambitious targets for achieving universal access to safely managed sanitation by 2030. The core indicator for SDG 6.2 creates positive incentives for governments, and development partners to invest in the whole sanitation chain, recognising the public health benefits of managing waste beyond initial containment. However, the target and indicators also create risks. Global accountability could be undermined by the challenge of accounting for progress across different service levels below the target of safely managed. There could also be perverse incentives to upgrade existing services, in order to meet the benchmark of safely managed, at the expense of extending basic services to those currently unserved. This paper examines methodological options for calculating a ‘total service gap’, a measure that would combine data on each rung of the service ladder to quantify how far away each country is from universal safely managed services. It conducts a sensitivity analysis to assess the validity of using uniform service level weights, and finds that this approach could add value to existing metrics. Through alternative data visualisations and other devices, it is argued that the total service gap could help to address the risks surrounding global accountability and perverse incentives. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 1044 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Improving Monitoring and Water Point Functionality in Rural Ethiopia

by Carmen Anthonj, Lisa Fleming, Ryan Cronk, Samuel Godfrey, Argaw Ambelu, Jane Bevan, Emanuele Sozzi and Jamie Bartram

Water 2018, 10(11), 1591; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10111591 - 07 Nov 2018

Cited by 18 | Viewed by 6122

Abstract

This study examines the patterns, trends, and factors associated with functional community water points in rural Ethiopia and identifies potential areas of improvement in terms of practitioner response to functionality and functionality monitoring. It was part of an integrated WaSH and nutrition program implemented by UNICEF Ethiopia and the Government of Ethiopia. Cross-sectional surveys were conducted to collect WaSH-related data in communities and WaSH committees from four community-based nutrition (CBN) program groupings in Ethiopia. In all areas, CBN was implemented, but only in less than half of the areas, a WaSH intervention was implemented. Seventy-three representative kebeles, comprising 30 intervention and 43 control communities, were surveyed. Two structured surveys were conducted. The ‘community survey’ addressed community water points and their functionality and the main areas for improvement needed. The ‘WaSH committee survey’ investigated technical and management aspects of water points and their functionality. Data were analyzed using bivariate regression to identify community characteristics and management practices associated with functionality of water points and explore opportunities to improve water point functionality and monitoring. In the communities, 65% of water points were functional. Eighty percent of communities had a WaSH committee. The WaSH committee members reported that the most used water point types were protected dug wells and boreholes, and that 80% of their water points were functional. India Mark II pumps were more likely to be functional and communities with longer established WaSH committees had higher water point functionality. Communities suggested that the key factors for water point sustainability were improving water quality and water pressure, reducing water collection time, and speeding up repair times. Taking community leaders’ ‘priority lists’ into consideration offers sustainable opportunities for demand-driven, adaptive and targeted design and implementation of rural water supply programs, which, if they include the grassroots level as key informants and actors of change, can succeed. Interventions should integrate the ‘voice’ of the community, the WaSH committees, and other stakeholders and thereby facilitate transdisciplinary approaches at different stages of program management (planning, monitoring, and evaluation). This would help closing the knowledge to action gap and improve policy, programming, practice, and service delivery. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 2359 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

A Review of the SDG 6 Synthesis Report 2018 from an Education, Training, and Research Perspective

by Angela Renata Cordeiro Ortigara, Melvyn Kay and Stefan Uhlenbrook

Water 2018, 10(10), 1353; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10101353 - 28 Sep 2018

Cited by 59 | Viewed by 11965

Abstract

In 2015, UN Member States adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6): “Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all”. Commonly known as the ‘water goal’, SDG 6 went well beyond the limited focus on water supply and sanitation in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and recognized the importance of all aspects of the water cycle in development and that water was embedded directly and indirectly in all 17 SDGs. In 2018, the UN published a report: “Sustainable Development Goal 6 Synthesis Report on Water and Sanitation 2018” (referred to in this paper as ‘the report’) that reviewed progress with SDG 6 at global and regional levels. Overall, the report concluded there was progress, but it was too slow, and the world was not on track to achieve SDG 6 by 2030 without a significant change of gear. The report was written primarily for those working in sustainable development to guide finance and resource allocation, but there was much embedded in the report that was of value to those engaged in research and in developing the much-needed capacity to plan and manage water resources, particularly in developing countries. This paper attempts to distill these issues and to ask how those involved in education, training, and research could contribute to enabling and accelerating progress towards achieving SDG 6. Three key areas of engagement were identified: the urgent need for more data and improved monitoring to assess SDG 6 progress and to enhance decision-making, the need to address the serious lack of human and institutional capacity that was constraining progress, and the challenge of taking research into policy and practice. Note: This paper is a review of selected aspects of the report (in which production the authors were chiefly involved as coordinators and editors), and as such most of the facts, figures, and discussion in this review are taken from the report. For this reason, we have not continually attributed them to the report to avoid repetition. However, in some cases, we have attributed report material to the primary sources where we considered it important to do so. We have also attributed material we have included, and which is not cited in the report. A review inevitably depends, to some extent, on the views of the reviewers and as such we have tried to make it clear where we are expressing our personal views rather than those expressed in the report. The report contains full references to all the primary sources. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 4893 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Assessing Water Scarcity Using the Water Poverty Index (WPI) in Golestan Province of Iran

by Masoud Jafari Shalamzari and Wanchang Zhang

Water 2018, 10(8), 1079; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10081079 - 13 Aug 2018

Cited by 40 | Viewed by 7879

Abstract

Population growth and rising water demand, climate change, severe droughts, and land-use changes are among the top severe issues in Iran. Water management in this country is sectoral and disintegrated. Each authority evaluates water based on its final intention and there is no commonplace indicator for evaluation programs. In this research, we used the Water Poverty Index (WPI) to map the status of water scarcity in a north-eastern province of Iran. Water poverty was measured based on five components of “Resources”, “Access”, “Capacity”, “Use”, and “Environment”. The scores on each component were then aggregated using the weighted multiplicative function, assuming equal weights for all components. The overall WPI was evaluated to be 41.1, signaling an alarming and serious water poverty in the study area. Based on the results, Azadshahr (29.1) and Gorgan (61.6) districts had the worst and the best conditions among all cases, respectively. To better understand the importance of WPI components, four weighting alternatives were used; however, none of them resulted in a tangible improvement of WPI index. The cross-correlation between the components was also evaluated, with Access and Capacity showing significant results. Leaving out “Capacity”, however, reduced WPI by 8.1. In total, “Access”, “Capacity”, and “Use” had the highest correlation with WPI, implying that any attempt to improve water poverty in the province must firstly tackle these issues. This study showed that WPI is an effective indicator of water scarcity assessment and could be used to make priorities for policy-making and water management. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 1273 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Dry Pipes: Associations between Utility Performance and Intermittent Piped Water Supply in Low and Middle Income Countries

by Jessica Kaminsky and Emily Kumpel

Water 2018, 10(8), 1032; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10081032 - 04 Aug 2018

Cited by 17 | Viewed by 4952

Abstract

Intermittent piped water supply impacts at least one billion people around the globe. Given the environmental and public health implications of poor water supply, there is a strong practical need to understand how and why intermittent supply occurs, and what strategies may be used to move utilities towards the provision of continuous water supply. Leveraging data from the International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities, we discover 42 variables that have statistically significant associations with intermittent water supply at the utility scale across 2115 utilities. We categorized these under the following themes: Physical infrastructure system scale, coverage, consumer type, public water points, financial, and non-revenue water and metering. This research identifies globally relevant factors with high potential for cross-context, scaled impact. In addition, using insights from the analysis, we provide empirically grounded recommendations and data needs for improved global indicators of utility performance related to intermittent supply. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 273 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

A Review of In-Situ and Remote Sensing Technologies to Monitor Water and Sanitation Interventions

by Luis Andres, Kwasi Boateng, Christian Borja-Vega and Evan Thomas

Water 2018, 10(6), 756; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10060756 - 09 Jun 2018

Cited by 59 | Viewed by 8165

Abstract

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), announced in September 2015, present a vision of achieving a higher level of human health and well-being worldwide by the year 2030. The SDG targets specific to water and sanitation call for more detailed monitoring and response to understand the coverage and quality of safely managed sources. It is hoped that improved monitoring of water and sanitation interventions will reveal more cost-effective and efficient ways of meeting the SDGs. In this paper, we review the landscape of approaches that can be used to support and improve on the water and sanitation targets SDG 6.1, “By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all”, and SDG 6.2, “By 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all and end open defecation, paying special attention to the needs of women and girls and those in vulnerable situations”. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

11 pages, 14181 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Assessment of Nitrate in Wells and Springs in the North Central Ethiopian Highlands

by Adugnaw T. Akale, Mamaru A. Moges, Dessalegn C. Dagnew, Seifu A. Tilahun and Tammo S. Steenhuis

Water 2018, 10(4), 476; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10040476 - 13 Apr 2018

Cited by 17 | Viewed by 5634

Abstract

Under the auspices of the UN Millennium Development Goals, access to safe drinking water in the developing world, including the Ethiopian highlands, has improved greatly. However, in many cases, it is not known how safe the water is. With the intensification of agriculture and increasing applications of fertilizers, high levels of nitrate are a concern. The objective of this study is to assess the nitrate levels in drinking water supply systems. To assess nitrate levels, we sampled 213 water supply points in a 4880 km² area in the northwest Ethiopian highlands. The results show that the average concentration was below the World Health Organization (WHO) health standard of 10 mg N-NO₃/L. The average concentration in wells was 3.3 mg N-NO₃/L and in springs was 1.8 mg N-NO₃/L. Only in three wells, that were in agricultural cropped areas, was the WHO standard exceeded. Wells in the agricultural fields had an average nitrate concentration of 3.6 mg N-NO₃/L, which was almost twice that on grazing land and four times that in upland wells. Spatially, the groundwater nitrate concentrations were greater in the moderately sloped parts of the study area where agriculture was intensive and denitrification limited. Thus, although current nitrate levels are safe, in the future, the nitrate concentration could exceed the WHO health standard when fertilizer use increases. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Graphical abstract

18 pages, 3663 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Modified Principal Component Analysis for Identifying Key Environmental Indicators and Application to a Large-Scale Tidal Flat Reclamation

by Kejian Chu, Wenjuan Liu, Yuntong She, Zulin Hua, Min Tan, Xiaodong Liu, Li Gu and Yongzhi Jia

Water 2018, 10(1), 69; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10010069 - 15 Jan 2018

Cited by 17 | Viewed by 5303

Abstract

Identification of the key environmental indicators (KEIs) from a large number of environmental variables is important for environmental management in tidal flat reclamation areas. In this study, a modified principal component analysis approach (MPCA) has been developed for determining the KEIs. The MPCA accounts for the two important attributes of the environmental variables: pollution status and temporal variation, in addition to the commonly considered numerical divergence attribute. It also incorporates the distance correlation (dCor) to replace the Pearson’s correlation to measure the nonlinear interrelationship between the variables. The proposed method was applied to the Tiaozini sand shoal, a large-scale tidal flat reclamation region in China. Five KEIs were identified as dissolved inorganic nitrogen, Cd, petroleum in the water column, Hg, and total organic carbon in the sediment. The identified KEIs were shown to respond well to the biodiversity of phytoplankton. This demonstrated that the identified KEIs adequately represent the environmental condition in the coastal marine system. Therefore, the MPCA is a practicable method for extracting effective indicators that have key roles in the coastal and marine environment. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

19 pages, 2178 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperReview

Establishing Sustainable Development Goal Baselines for Household Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Services

by Robert Bain, Richard Johnston, Francesco Mitis, Christie Chatterley and Tom Slaymaker

Water 2018, 10(12), 1711; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10121711 - 23 Nov 2018

Cited by 62 | Viewed by 8767

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), through the Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP), are responsible for global monitoring of the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets for drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH). The SDGs represent a fundamental shift in household WASH monitoring with a new focus on service levels and the incorporation of hygiene. This article reflects on the process of establishing SDG baselines and the methods used to generate national, regional and global estimates for the new household WASH indicators. The JMP 2017 update drew on over 3000 national data sources, primarily household surveys (n = 1443), censuses (n = 309) and administrative data (n = 1494). Whereas most countries could generate estimates for basic drinking water and basic sanitation, fewer countries could report on basic handwashing facilities, water quality and the disposal of waste from onsite sanitation. Based on data for 96 and 84 countries, respectively, the JMP estimates that globally 2.1 billion (29%) people lacked safely managed drinking water services and 4.5 billion (61%) lacked safely managed sanitation services in 2015. The expanded JMP inequalities database also finds substantial disparities by wealth and sub-national regions. The SDG baselines for household WASH reveal the scale of the challenge associated with achieving universal safely managed services and the substantial acceleration needed in many countries to achieve even basic services for everyone by 2030. Many countries have begun to localise the global SDG targets and are investing in data collection to address the SDG data gaps, whether through the integration of new elements in household surveys or strengthening collection and reporting of information through administrative and regulatory systems. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 428 KiB

Open AccessReview

Quantifying Averted Disability-Adjusted Life Years as a Performance Indicator for Water Quality Interventions: A Review of Current Methodologies and Challenges

by Darcy M. Anderson, Evan A. Thomas and Thomas F. Clasen

Water 2018, 10(6), 744; https://doi.org/10.3390/w10060744 - 07 Jun 2018

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 4106

Abstract

Sustainable access to safe drinking water protects against infectious disease and promotes overall health. Despite considerable progress toward increasing water access, safe water quality and reliable service delivery remain a challenge. Traditional financing strategies pay implementers based on inputs and activities, with minimal incentives for water quality monitoring and sustained service operation. Pay-for-performance offers an alternative financing strategy that delivers all or a portion of payment based on performance indicators of desired outputs or outcomes. A pay-for-performance approach in the water sector could quantify and incentivize health impact. Averted disability-adjusted life years (ADALYs) have been used as a performance indicator to measure the burden of disease averted due to environmental health interventions. Water-related disease burden can be measured for application as an ADALYs performance indicator following either comparative risk assessment or quantitative microbial risk assessment. Comparative risk assessment models disease burden using water source type as a proxy indicator of microbial water quality, while quantitative microbial risk assessment models disease burden using concentrations of indicator pathogens. This paper compares these risk assessment methodologies, and summarizes the limitations of applying these approaches toward quantifying ADALYs as a performance indicator for water quality interventions. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monitoring and Governance of Water and Sanitation Services and Water Resources for Sustainable Development)

► Show Figures