Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean 1
Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water
in Latin America and the Caribbean
A regional perspective based on data from the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) for
Water Supply and Sanitation and an inequality analysis using recent national household surveys and censuses
WHO / UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation
© U
NIC
EF/U
NI1
3191
5/Do
rmin
o
2 Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean
In Latin America and the Caribbean
83% of the population used an improved sanitation facility in 2015
Yet 18 million still practised open defecation
In Latin America and the Caribbean
95% of the population used an improved drinking water source in 2015
Yet 34 million still used unimproved drinking water sources
Improved sanitation coverage (%)
0-5960-6970-7980-8990-100Missing value
Improved drinking water coverage (%)
0-5960-6970-7980-8990-100Missing value
The
boun
darie
s an
d de
sign
atio
ns u
sed
on th
ese
map
s do
not
im
ply
offic
ial e
ndor
sem
ent o
r acc
epta
nce
by th
e Un
ited
Natio
ns
Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean 3
Sanitation and water ladders provide a way to show inequalities in the level of service used by households and trends in coverage across these service levels over time. For sanitation this ranges from the practice of open defecation and unimproved sanitation to the use of an improved
sanitation facility. For drinking water, there are also four levels with the highest level of service being piped water on premises. Definitions and data sources are provided at the end of this snapshot.
36 34 35
50
Open defecation
Unimprovedsanitation
Shared
sanitation
Improvedsanitation
Latin America and the
Caribbean
South America
Central America and
Mexico
Caribbean
Rural sanitation ladders Urban sanitation ladders
8088
6
78
46 1
8189
459561
7887
9
104
390
81 79
1116
5 33 2
1990 2015 1990 2015 1990 2015 1990 2015Latin America
and the Caribbean
South America
Central America and
Mexico
Caribbean1990 2015 1990 2015 1990 2015 1990 2015
Trends in rural and urban sanitation in Latin America and the Caribbean, 1990-2015
64
7
18
1743
12
621
3
21
2044
15
695
10
15
1545
6
62
9
1113
13
28
14
Sanitation and drinking water ladders
In rural Latin America and the Caribbean large increases in improved drinking water coverage have been made since 1990, driven by an expansion of piped water on premises. Whereas coverage of piped water on premises is high in South America (89%), it is considerably lower in rural
Central America and Mexico (27%) and rural Caribbean (38%). The use of unimproved drinking water sources is uncommon in South America but approximately one in five still rely on these sources in Central America and Mexico and the Caribbean.
Coverage of piped water is much
higher in urban areas of LAC, with piped water on premises serving over 9 out of 10 urban dwellers in South America and the Caribbean. The use of unimproved drinking water sources in urban areas is uncommon in all three sub-regions but highest in Central America and Mexico (5%).
Overall in Latin America and the Caribbean, rural improved sanitation coverage increased from 36% to 64% between 1990 and 2015. The biggest increases were in South America and Central America and Mexico. Comparatively few households share sanitation facilities in South America but sharing of an improved facility is
more widespread in the Caribbean and Central America and Mexico, where it is practised by at least 10% of the population.
Urban improved sanitation coverage is higher than in rural areas in all three sub-regions and was close to 90% in South America (89%) and Central America and Mexico (87%). Urban
sanitation was somewhat lower in the Caribbean and declined slightly between 1990 and 2015.
Whereas one in four in rural areas practised open defecation in 1990, this had dropped to just over one in ten by 2015. Open defecation is most common in rural areas of South America and rural Caribbean.
Surfacewater
Unimproved
Other improved
Piped pnpremises
Rural drinking water ladders Urban drinking water ladders
Trends in rural and urban drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean, 1990-2015
37
68
26
1617
1020
6
7989
149
7 10 1
11
27
48
55
29
1412
4
2938
5043
11 10
10 9
8894
63
5 31 0
97 98
21 200 0
68 72
25 23
6 51 0
8391
127
4 11 1
Latin America and the
Caribbean
South America
Central America and
Mexico
Caribbean1990 2015 1990 2015 1990 2015 1990 2015
Latin America and the
Caribbean
South America
Central America and
Mexico
Caribbean1990 2015 1990 2015 1990 2015 1990 2015
4 Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean
Number of people practising open defecation in Latin America and the Caribbean in 2015 (thousands)
Proportion of rural population practising open defecation (%), 2015
Use of surface water in Latin America and the Caribbean in 2015
Other countries, 3762
Mexico, 1050
Peru, 1616
Venezuela, 1686(BolivarianRepublic of)
Bolivia, 1888(PlurinationalState of)
Haiti, 2011
Colombia, 2192
Brazil, 4277
Colombia, 2341
Peru, 1165
Ecuador, 930Brazil, 929
Bolivia, 699(PlurinationalState of)
Guatemala, 601
Other countries, 1612
0 10 20 30 40 50
Honduras
Ecuador
Brazil
Colombia
Nicaragua
Suriname
Peru
Venezuela
Haiti
Bolivia
Proportion of rural population using surface water (%), 20150 10 20 30 40 50
Panama
Haiti
Nicaragua
Guatemala
Venezuela
Suriname
El Salvador
Peru
Ecuador
Colombia
Bolivia 20
19
15
15
12
11
9
7
6
6
5
46
35
29
20
18
14
14
13
11
11
Population with no water and sanitation serviceIn Latin America and the Caribbean, many people still do not have any water and sanitation services, relying on the practice of open defecation or using surface waters for drinking. The charts below show how the lack of services is distributed amongst countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Open defecation is practised by at least one in ten living in rural areas in ten countries in 2015
In 2015, 8.5 million people used surface water for drinking in Latin America and the Caribbean
At least 5% of the rural population used surface water in 11 countries in 2015
Key facts • In Latin America and the Caribbean in 2015, 18 million people still practised open defecation and 8.5 million
people relied on surface water for drinking.• In seven countries over 1 million people practiced open defecation in 2015, with the largest numbers in Brazil,
Colombia and Haiti.• In six countries over half a million people used surface waters for drinking in 2015, with the largest numbers in
Colombia, Peru and Ecuador.• Open defecation was practised by almost half of the rural population in Bolivia in 2015 and one in five used
surface waters for drinking.
In 2015, 18 million people practised open defecation in Latin America and the Caribbean
Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean 5
100
80
60
40
20
0
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
drin
king
wat
er (%
)
Plurinational State of Bolivia Paraguay Colombia Mexico
84
38
95
80
21
89 88 87
41
47
85
95
76
54
74
56
1995 2012 1995 2012 1995 2012 1995 2012
RICHEST POOREST
Trends in use of improved drinking water in the richest and poorest rural wealth quintiles, 1995–2012
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Impr
oved
sani
tatio
n (%
)
Central and Mexico, 82
South America, 84
Caribbean, 74 Peru, 76Suriname, 79Colombia, 81Guyana, 84Ecuador, 85
Paraguay, 89Venezuela, 94
Argentina, 96Uruguay, 96
Chile, 99
Urban, 85
Rural, 68
Richest urban, 96
Poorest urban, 54
Richest rural, 82
Poorest rural, 37
LAC, 83
Bolivia, 50
Use of improved sanitation by urban wealth quintile (%)
1000 20 40 60 80
POOREST SECOND MIDDLE FOURTH RICHEST POOREST SECOND MIDDLE FOURTH RICHEST
Mexico
Paraguay
Jamaica
Guatemala
Dominican Rep.
Belize
Colombia
Honduras
Peru
Nicaragua
Haiti
Belize
Mexico
Dominican Rep.
Guatemala
Paraguay
Bolivia(Plurinational State of) Jamaica
Peru
Colombia
Honduras
Nicaragua
Haiti
Use of improved drinking water by rural wealth quintile (%)
1000 20 40 60 80
Inequalities by wealthLarge gaps in access to improved sanitation and drinking water exist between rich and poor.
The chart below, called an “equity tree” shows just how much difference
there is between the poorest in rural areas and the richest in urban areas of Colombia.
Below, sanitation and drinking water coverage is shown by wealth quintile
for urban sanitation and rural drinking water. These show that there are large difference in almost all countries with available data.
Improved sanitation coverage was only 37% amongst the poorest in rural areas of Colombia in 2012.
Sanitation and drinking water coverage is considerably lower for the poorest in many countries in Latin America and the Caribbean
The gap between the poorest and richest in rural areas appears to be closing in several countries in LAC
Key facts• There are large gaps in access to improved sanitation and drinking water between rich and poor households
in Latin America and the Caribbean. • Use of improved drinking water amongst the poorest in rural areas is catching up with the richest• Weath quintile trends are available for only 12 countries in the region. Information on access among the
poorest is essential for monitoring progressive realisation of the human rights to water and sanitation and achieving equitable access.
Improved sanitation by country, location and wealth quintile (%)
6 Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean
0 10 20 30 40 50
Rural and urban
Education
Region
Ethnicity
Literacy
Religion
Language
Disability Census Survey
There is a wealth of nationally representative information on water and sanitation services collected by national statistical agencies in Latin America and the Caribbean. In this snapshot we illustrate the potential to use this information to gain a better understanding of sub-national inequalities in access to these services. Data are drawn from publicly available censuses and household surveys conducted since 2010.
A total of 31 data sources were found, 11 censuses and 20 household surveys. Where possible information on the following stratifiers was extracted:
• Region• Literacy• Education• Ethnicity• Language• Disability• Religion
All national censuses and national household surveys that collect information on water and sanitation can be used to investigate disparities in access. Disaggregation is, however, only possible when censuses and surveys have collected relevant information about the household and its members. In all cases sub-national administrative regions were available and in the majority it was possible to determine the educational level (>95%) and ethnicity (71%) of at least one household member. Information on religion and language were less common and disability was exclusively included in censuses. For religion, this may reflect a lower political priority relative to other stratifiers in some countries. Language was included in comparatively few cases but may be a particularly useful measure of to assess coverage amongst indigenous population.
In this snapshot each equity stratifier is treated independently. More detailed analysis for individual countries is possible and could examine the extent to which inequalities are overlapping or mutually reinforcing. Equally importantly we have focused on equity stratifiers that are considered important at a regional level but participatory approaches could be used to identify country-specific disadvantaged groups for more in-depth analysis of inequalities.
Whilst most censuses and surveys collect information on education and ethnicity fewer ask about literacy, religion, language and disability
Number of national census and household surveys
Other inequalitiesInsights from national censuses and national household surveys
Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean 7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
89
93
82
93
9799
6467
72
88
92
99
UruguayArgentinaMexicoEcuadorPanamaBrazil
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
drin
king
wat
er (%
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
33
5054
91
84
92
74
90
UruguayEcuadorAgentinaPanama0
5
10
15
20
25
22
3
1
CastellanoGuaraní y CastellanoGuaraní
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
Popu
latio
n us
ing
unim
prov
ed s
anita
tion
in P
arag
uay
(%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
70
92
79
84
90
33
5054
72
91
UruguayMexicoEcuadorArgentinaPanama
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
NationalIndigenous National
Indigenous
Indigenous
Unimproved sanitationAfrodescendent
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
89
93
82
93
9799
6467
72
88
92
99
UruguayArgentinaMexicoEcuadorPanamaBrazil
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
drin
king
wat
er (%
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
33
5054
91
84
92
74
90
UruguayEcuadorAgentinaPanama0
5
10
15
20
25
22
3
1
CastellanoGuaraní y CastellanoGuaraní
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
Popu
latio
n us
ing
unim
prov
ed s
anita
tion
in P
arag
uay
(%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
70
92
79
84
90
33
5054
72
91
UruguayMexicoEcuadorArgentinaPanama
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
NationalIndigenous National
Indigenous
Indigenous
Unimproved sanitationAfrodescendent
Most censuses and several household surveys ask household members about their ethnic group and in some cases the main languages spoken by household members. These are important characteristics in identifying the most disadvantaged populations. Below we focus primarily on
data from the 2010 round of censuses, comparing coverage between indigenous groups and the national average as well as between indigenous and afrodescendents. An example from Paraguay EHP 2014 also shows that language can be strongly associated with sanitation coverage.
Source: EHP 2014
Ethnicity and language
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
89
93
82
93
9799
6467
72
88
92
99
UruguayArgentinaMexicoEcuadorPanamaBrazil
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
drin
king
wat
er (%
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
33
5054
91
84
92
74
90
UruguayEcuadorAgentinaPanama0
5
10
15
20
25
22
3
1
CastellanoGuaraní y CastellanoGuaraní
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
Popu
latio
n us
ing
unim
prov
ed s
anita
tion
in P
arag
uay
(%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
70
92
79
84
90
33
5054
72
91
UruguayMexicoEcuadorArgentinaPanama
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
NationalIndigenous National
Indigenous
Indigenous
Unimproved sanitationAfrodescendent
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
89
93
82
93
9799
6467
72
88
92
99
UruguayArgentinaMexicoEcuadorPanamaBrazil
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
drin
king
wat
er (%
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
33
5054
91
84
92
74
90
UruguayEcuadorAgentinaPanama0
5
10
15
20
25
22
3
1
CastellanoGuaraní y CastellanoGuaraní
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
Popu
latio
n us
ing
unim
prov
ed s
anita
tion
in P
arag
uay
(%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
70
92
79
84
90
33
5054
72
91
UruguayMexicoEcuadorArgentinaPanama
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
NationalIndigenous National
Indigenous
Indigenous
Unimproved sanitationAfrodescendent
Afrodescendents often have higher improved sanitation coverage than indigenous populations
In Paraguay, speaking only Guarani is strongly associated with use of unimproved sanitation
Improved sanitation and improved drinking water coverage is lower among indigenous people in several countries with data
8 Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean
Prop
ortio
n of
the
popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
drin
king
wat
er s
ourc
es (%
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Brazil
Argentin
a
Barbad
osBeli
ze
Bolivia
Chile
Colombia
Costa
RicaCu
ba
Dominican
Republic
Ecuad
or
Guatemala Hait
i
Honduras
Jamaic
a
Mexico
Nicarag
ua
Panam
a
Paragu
ayPeru
Surin
ame
Uruguay
Venez
uela
Regions – drinking waterFor all countries it is possible to investigate coverage by region. In the map and chart below, differences in coverage are shown for regions of Brazil. Whilst piped water on premises was over 80% nationally according to the census
in 2010, coverage was much lower in several regions – especially Rondonia where just over one in three used piped water on premises.
Piped water on premises varies by region in Brazil, with lowest levels in Acre, Amapa, Rondonia and Para
Amazonas, 62
Acre, 45
Rondonia, 37
Roraima, 79 Amapa,
56
Para, 46
Piaui, 71
Maranhao, 64
Tocantins, 78 Bahia,
79
Goias, 79
Minas Gerais, 86
Espirito Santo, 83
Parana, 88
Santa Catarina, 81
Rio De Janeiro, 84Sao Paulo,
95
Rio Grande Do Sul,
85
Ceara, 76
Alagoas, 67
Pernambuco, 75
Sergipe, 82
0-5960-6970-7980-8990-100Missing value
Paraiba, 75
Rio GrandeDo Norte, 85
Mato Grosso, 74
Mato GrossoDo Sul,
83
Brazilia,95
Piped water on premises coverage (%)
Substantial gaps exist in improved drinking water coverage between regions within many countries in LAC
Source: 2010 round of censuses and household surveys
In the chart above each dot represents a region within the country. Regions with similar levels of coverage are shown side by side. We can see from the chart that the number of regions varies between countries making international comparisons challenging – whereas there are 7 regions
in Panama there are 19 in Honduras and 32 in Mexico. Nevertheless, we find dramatic differences in coverage between the regions with the highest coverage and the lowest coverage in almost all countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Surface waterUnimproved
Other ImprovedPiped onto premises
NationalAmapaParáRondoniaAcrePo
pula
tion
by d
rinki
ng w
ater
sou
rce
(%)
The boundaries and designations used on these maps do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations
Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean 9
Regions – sanitationSimilarly, coverage of improved sanitation varies considerably by region. In the map below, differences in coverage are shown for regions in Honduras from the recent national census (2013).
Improved sanitation ranges from 88% in Atlantida and Choluteca to only 30 % in Gracias A Dios, Honduras.
In seven countries there is at least one region where less than half of the population uses an improved sanitation facility
Use of improved sanitation also varies greatly between regions in most countries in Latin America and the Caribbean. In the chart above we find that improved
sanitation coverage is below 50% in at least one region in seven countries. In Haiti and Bolivia coverage of improved sanitation is below 50% in all regions of the country.
Yoro, 80
Olancho, 70
Paraíso, 72
Choluteca, 88
Valle, 62
La Paz, 72
Intibucá, 58Lempira, 59
Ocotepeque, 77
Copán, 75
SantaBarbara, 75
Comayagua, 85
FranciscoMorazán, 77
Atlántida, 88
Islas de Bahía, 83
Cortes, 74Colón, 63
Gracias a Dios, 30
0-2425-4950-7475-100Missing value
Improved sanitation coverage (%)
020
4060
8010
0
Prop
ortio
n of
the
popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n fa
cilit
ies
(%)
Argentin
a
Barbad
osBeli
ze
Bolivia
Chile
Colombia
Costa
RicaCu
ba
Dominican
Republic
Ecuad
or
Guatemala Hait
i
Honduras
Jamaic
a
Mexico
Nicarag
ua
Panam
a
Paragu
ayPeru
Surin
ame
Uruguay
Venez
uela
Source: 2010 round of censuses and household surveys
The boundaries and designations used on these maps do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations
10 Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean
Literacy and educationLiterate and more educated households often have greater access to services and may also be more aware of the benefits of higher levels of water and sanitation services. They can be more empowered and have greater political voice to demand access to services as one of their basic
rights. The charts below show differences in the practice of open defecation by literacy and the gap in coverage between the national level and households where the household head has no formal education.
Where a household head has no formal education improved drinking water and sanitation coverage can be much lower than the national average
Difference in improved sanitation coverage among educated household heads (% pt.)
Difference in improved drinking water coverage among educated household heads (% pt.)
Illiteracy is associated with lower coverage of improved sanitation and piped water on premises in several countries in Latin America and the Caribbean
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
LiterateIlliterate
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
35
74 75
8185
9390
97
23
40
60
66
72
91 93 94
CostaRica
UruguayArgentinaMexicoEcuadorDominicanRepublic
PanamaBolivia
Popu
latio
n us
ing
pipe
d w
ater
on
prem
ises
(%)
LiterateIlliterate
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
69
81
71
83
95 94
6165 65 66
87 88
Costa RicaArgentinaBrazilBoliviaEcuadorDominicanRepublic
Popu
latio
n us
ing
impr
oved
san
itatio
n (%
)
LiterateIlliterate
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
35
74 75
8185
9390
97
23
40
60
66
72
91 93 94
CostaRica
UruguayArgentinaMexicoEcuadorDominicanRepublic
PanamaBolivia
Popu
latio
n us
ing
pipe
d w
ater
on
prem
ises
(%)
LiterateIlliterate
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
69
81
71
83
95 94
6165 65 66
87 88
Costa RicaArgentinaBrazilBoliviaEcuadorDominicanRepublic
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
3
8
9
11
13
14
15
19
33
34Panama MICS 2013
Suriname MICS 2010
Peru DHS 2012
Dominican RepublicDHS 2011-2012
Nicaragua ENDESA 2011
Colombia DHS 2010
Honduras DHS 2011-2012
Argentina MICS 2011-2012
Belize MICS 2011
Costa Rica MICS 2011
Chile CASEN 2013
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
0
1
0
9
11
12
2
7
15
23Panama MICS 2013
Suriname MICS 2010
Peru DHS 2012
Dominican RepublicDHS 2011-2012
Nicaragua ENDESA 2011
Colombia DHS 2010
Honduras DHS 2011-2012
Argentina MICS 2011-2012
Belize MICS 2011
Costa Rica MICS 2011
Chile CASEN 2013
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
3
8
9
11
13
14
15
19
33
34Panama MICS 2013
Suriname MICS 2010
Peru DHS 2012
Dominican RepublicDHS 2011-2012
Nicaragua ENDESA 2011
Colombia DHS 2010
Honduras DHS 2011-2012
Argentina MICS 2011-2012
Belize MICS 2011
Costa Rica MICS 2011
Chile CASEN 2013
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
0
1
0
9
11
12
2
7
15
23Panama MICS 2013
Suriname MICS 2010
Peru DHS 2012
Dominican RepublicDHS 2011-2012
Nicaragua ENDESA 2011
Colombia DHS 2010
Honduras DHS 2011-2012
Argentina MICS 2011-2012
Belize MICS 2011
Costa Rica MICS 2011
Chile CASEN 2013
Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean 11
ReligionReligion of a household head may be a barrier to accessing services in some countries. It is also possible that particular religions are associated with where households live (rural vs urban), their education level and ethnicity. The MICS
survey in Suriname illustrates how big differences can be. Sanitation coverage is much lower for households that practise a “traditional religion”.
Source: MICS 2013
In households with a disabled person, water and sanitation coverage appears to be similar to the national average as shown in the table below. The surveys and censuses, however, do not collect information on specific challenges faced by disabled people and the definitions of disability vary considerably between countries.
Definitions
Improved drinking water. An improved drinking water source is one that, by the nature of its construction, adequately protects the source from outside contamination, particularly faecal matter. Improved sources include: Piped household water connection located inside the user’s dwelling, plot or yard, public taps or standpipes, tube wells or boreholes, protected dug wells, protected springs, rainwater collection. Bottled water is considered ‘improved’ when the household uses an improved source for cooking and personal hygiene. The definition of Improved drinking water does not capture accessibility, availability and quality of the service; the Sustainable Development Goal indicator “safely managed drinking water” will consider all of these elements.
Improved sanitation. An improved sanitation facility is one that hygienically separates human excreta from human contact. Improved sanitation facilities include: Flush/pour flush to piped sewer system, septic tank or pit latrine, ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrine, pit latrine with slab or composting toilet. Only facilities that are not shared or not public are considered improved. The definition of Improved sanitation does not address the management of the sanitation chain which is a priority for the Sustainable Development Goal indicator “safely managed sanitation”.
DataThis snapshot is drawn from the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Program for Water Supply and Sanitation (JMP) 2015 Update and further analysis of household survey and census data (2010-2015) in Latin America and the Caribbean. The JMP exclusively based the estimates for Latin America and the Caribbean on nationally representative data from National Statistics Offices, such as household surveys and national censuses.
For more data and information on the JMP and monitoring of water and sanitation and hygiene (WASH) during the Sustainable Development Goal period visit: www.wssinfo.org
Practising a traditional religion is associated with lower sanitation coverage in Suriname
Country Indicator Disabled NationalCosta Rica(any disability)
Improved waterImproved sanitation
9597
9597
Ecuador(“permanent” disability)
Improved waterImproved sanitation
8177
8379
Mexico(physical or mental)
Improved waterImproved sanitation
9382
9384
Panama(any disability in list)
Improved waterImproved sanitation
9269
9370
Disability
Open defecation
Unimproved sanitation
Shared sanitation
Improved sanitation
Prop
ortio
n of
the
popu
latio
n by
sani
tatio
n fa
cilit
y (%
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Traditional religionNo religionOther religionChristianityIslamHinduism
12 Inequalities in sanitation and drinking water in Latin America and the Caribbean
A woman from the indigenous Rama community carries buckets filled with water that she just fetched from an underground well, on the island of Rama Cay, in the eastern coastal Bluefields Lagoon, in South Atlantic Autonomous Region, Nicaragua. The well’s water, which is not safe for drinking, is only used for household purposes such as washing clothes or cleaning. © UNICEF/UNI131919/Dormino
JMP website: www.wssinfo.org
