Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Monitoring WASH in the post-2015 era: An emerging framework
Rick Johnston, WHO
Rob Bain, UNICEF
October 26, 2015
STRUCTURE AND SCOPE
2
2030 Sustainable Development Agenda
Transforming
Our World:
The 2030
Agenda for
Sustainable
Development
From MDGs to SDGs Water and Sanitation in MDGs
• Total of 8 goals, 21 targets
• 1 target under “Environmental Sustainability” goal
• Two core indicators: drinking-water and sanitation
• Primarily relevant to low income countries
• Monitoring by JMP, primarily using household surveys
• Total of 17 goals, 169 targets
• 8 targets under “Water and Sanitation” goal
• Twelve core indicators, many sub-indicators
• Relevant to all countries
• Monitoring by national authorities, feeding into regional and global reports
Water and Sanitation in SDGs
17 SDGs - 169 targets
Goal 6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
Goal 6
6.1 Drinking
Water 6.2
Sanitation and
Hygiene
6.3 Water
quality 6.4
Water-use
Efficiency
6.5 Water
resource managem
ent
6.6 Eco-
systems
6.A International cooperation and capacity development
6.B Local
participation
Means of Implementation
Goal 6: Monitoring initiatives
Goal 6
6.1 Drinking
Water 6.2
Sanitation and
Hygiene
6.3 Water
quality 6.4
Water-use
Efficiency
6.5 Water
resource managem
ent
6.6 Eco-
systems
JMP
GEMI GLAAS
Means of Implementation
6.A International cooperation and capacity development
6.B Local
participation
Inter Agency Expert Group on SDG Indicators
8
Membership • 28 member states (plus observers)
• Statistical experts from international agencies (MDG IAEG+)
• Regional commissions, academia, civil society
• UN Statistical Division as Secretariat
Expected outputs by March 2016 1. Integrated statistical framework for monitoring of the SDGs
2. Assessment of inter-linkages between target indicators
3. Criteria for selection of global indicators
4. Final list of global indicators
Annual SDG Progress Report
12 proposed indicators for Goal 6 Indicator Lead agencies Indicator (brief title)
6.1.1 WHO/UNICEF Safely managed drinking water services
6.2.1 WHO/UNICEF Safely managed sanitation services
6.2.2 WHO/UNICEF Handwashing in the home
6.3.1 WHO, Habitat Safely treated wastewater
6.3.2 UNEP Ambient water quality in water bodies
6.4.1 FAO Level of water stress
6.4.2 FAO Change in water use-efficiency over time
6.5.1 UNEP Degree of integrated water resource management implementation
6.5.2 UNECE, UNEP Transboundary basin areas with operational arrangements for cooperation
6.6.1 UNEP Change in wetlands extent over time
6.A OECD, WHO, UNEP
Water and sanitation ODA as part of coordinated spending plans
6.B WHO, UNEP Participation of local communities in water and sanitation management
JMP proposals
WASH and other targets
1.4 Access to basic services for the poor Household access to basic drinking water, sanitation and hygiene
2.2 End malnutrition 3.3 Combat water-borne diseases 3.8 Universal health coverage Household WASH proposed as a tracer intervention
4.a Education facilities Basic drinking-water, sanitation and hygiene facilities in schools
10.3 Reduce inequalities of outcome 11.1 Safe and affordable housing and basic services (urban) 11.5 Reduce deaths from water related disasters
10
Follow-up and Review
Country
• Accountability
• Translate global targets into national targets
• Review commitments, policies, progress
Regional
• Peer review
• Mutual exchange of experiences
• Regional issues
• Thematic focus issues
Global
• Periodic thematic review
• Knowledge sharing
• Review means of implementation and global partnership
11
JMP and the SDGs
• What’s the same (mostly)?
– Basic services (similar to improved facilities)
– Data from household surveys
– Focus on inequalities (even more so)
• What’s new?
– Higher levels of service (safely managed wat, san)
– Hygiene
– WASH in Schools and Health Care Facilities
12
“Leave no-one behind”: Data will be disaggregated
Inequalities: no target met unless met for all
13
• Affordability
• Urban and rural
• Wealth
• Sub-national regional distribution
• Locally important disadvantaged groups
2015 2020 2025 2030
Advantaged
Disadvantaged
Inequalities tracked by JMP
14
Emerging ladders
Household WASH
16
HYGIENE, WASH IN SCHOOLS AND HEALTH FACILITIES
17
Hygiene
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
• Handwashing with soap • Menstrual hygiene management • Food hygiene
18
Handwashing at home
Indicator 6.2.2 Population with handwashing facilities with soap and water at home
• Standard question in MICS and DHS since 2009
• Observation by survey teams
• Infrastructure as proxy for behaviour
• Data available from 50+ countries
19
Accessibility
Availability
20
WASH in Schools and Health Facilities
• “Universal” means in all settings
• Basic access
– Water on or near premises, in adequate quantity
– Gender-separated toilets on or near premises, in adequate quantity
– Handwashing facilities and supplies
– Facilities for private management of menstrual materials
• Link to facility assessment surveys (outputs)
21
22
WASH in Schools
• Harmonization of questions in facility surveys
– UNESCO-supported formal education surveys
– UNICEF-supported WASH in Schools assessments
• Increasing inclusion in sector MIS
23
WASH in Schools
24
WASH in Health Facilities
• Harmonization between major institutional surveys
– SARA, SPA, SDI
• Basic WASH indicators
25
WASH in Health Facilities
26
Core and expanded indicators
• SARA, SDI, SPA (HMIS) /UIS, WinS, EMIS
• Harmonization process underway
• Access to water
– Location or travel time
– Functional (sometimes with observation)
• Access to toilet/latrine
– Accessible (sometimes with observation)
– Functional (sometimes with observation)
Developing expanded list
Gap analysis – Quality
– Sufficiency
– Accessibility (e.g. disability, locked facilities)
– Density (number of taps, toilets)
– Gender-separated toilets
– Handwashing (near toilets, for patients…)
– Menstrual Hygiene Management
– Cleaning and maintenance routines…
Next steps
• Publish/revise core and expanded sets of indicators and questions (WinS & WinHCF)
• Apply expanded sets in field surveys
• Support integration of core indicators in MIS
• Collect and analyze data, update global reports
29
Discussion
• Which inequalities can/should be measured at global and national levels?
• What are the challenges faced in monitoring WASH in institutional settings?
• What are appropriate indicators of hygiene in institutions?
– Including menstrual hygiene management, access by those with limited mobility…
30
SAFELY MANAGED DRINKING WATER
31
Safely Managed Drinking Water
6.1 By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all
Indicator 6.1.1 Population using safely managed drinking water services Definition: Population using an improved drinking water source which is: • located on premises, • available when needed, and • free of faecal and priority chemical contamination
32
Accessibility
Quality
Availability
MDG/SDG Service ladder Progressive realization
Monitoring ladder SD
G 6
.1
Safely managed drinking water
On premises, available when needed and meets water quality standards
All developed countries, and some developing
countries
M
DG
co
nti
nu
ity Basic water
Improved facility within 30 minutes round trip collection time
Most developing and some developed countries report
Unimproved water
Facility which does not protect against contamination
Most developing and some developed countries report
No service Surface water All countries report
(applies to developing countries)
33 D
eve
lop
ing
D
eve
lop
ed
Where will the data come from?
Criterion Household Surveys Regulatory authorities
Availability Now: What people report using
New? Is water always available
from your main drinking water
source?
Coverage
Hours of service (piped)
Accessibility Now: What people report using
New? Has there been any time in
the last month when you have not
been able to access water when
needed?
Maximum distance/
travel time
Household connections
(piped supplies)
Quality New: Water quality testing in
household surveys
Compliance with
national norms, WSPs
34
Affordability?
Water quality in household surveys
35
• Testing E. coli (and As) in national surveys
– Bangladesh, Ghana
– Nepal, Congo
• 2016 surveys planned:
– Cote d’Ivoire, Lebanon
– Nigeria, Ethiopia
– Others…
E. coli in household water
36
82
62 62
22 18
14
Nepal Ghana Bangladesh
> 1 CFU/100 mL
>100 CFU/100 mL
“A glass of water you would give a child to drink”
Water safety from regulators
• Some regulators have information on…
– Surveillance (water quality verification)
– Risk management (water safety plans)
– Other aspects (on premises, continuity, affordability…)
• Portugal: “safe water” increased from 50% (1993) to 84% (2004) to 98% (2014)
• Serbia: 80% under surveillance, “known safe water”
• South Africa: “Blue Drop” regulation, 25% of systems with 95% compliance
37
Challenges
• Differences between global and local norms and definitions of safe management
• Harmonisation and standardisation of emerging data on quality and availability
• Integration of new sources of information
– Household surveys
– Administrative and regulatory data
– Other (e.g. Earth observations)
38
Safely Managed Drinking Water
Qualifiers
Regulatory data
Surveys, Censuses
39
Triangulation
Accessibility
Quality/Safety
Availability
SAFELY MANAGED SANITATION
40
Safely Managed Sanitation
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
Indicator 6.2.1 Pop. using safely managed sanitation services
Definition: Pop. using an improved sanitation facility which is:
• not shared with other households and where
• excreta are safely disposed in situ or
• transported and treated off-site
41
Accessibility
Quality
42
MDG/SDG Service ladder Progressive realization
Monitoring ladder SD
G 6
.2
Safely managed sanitation
Going beyond hygienic separation of excreta from human contact , including transport and treatment
All developed countries, some developing countries
MD
G c
on
tin
uit
y
Basic sanitation Private basic sanitation Most developing and some developed countries report
Shared sanitation Improved sanitation Most developing and some developed countries report
Unimproved sanitation
Fixed point defecation All countries report (applies
to developing countries)
No service Open defecation All countries report
(applies to some countries) D
eve
lop
ing
D
eve
lop
ed
Shared sanitation
• Not counted for MDG tracking
• Recommendation of “limited sharing”
– Data limitations
– Lack of clear threshold for health outcomes
– Concerns about human rights, safety, dignity
• Propose to continue to exclude shared sanitation in SDG tracking
– Possible alternative: on-premises sanitation
43
…where excreta are safely disposed in situ or transported and treated off-site
Population using… From which faecal wastes…
Sewer connections Reach a treatment plant and are adequately treated before discharge
Septic tanks Are safely stored on site, or emptied and treated off-site
Latrines Are safely stored on site, or emptied and treated off-site
Faecal waste flow framework
45
New
dis
aggr
egat
ion
Safely disposed in situ
• When latrines and septic tanks are not emptied, is some portion of the waste “safely managed”?
– Technically sound: construction, soil, water level
– Low loading rate, long storage time
– Not shared? Rural and urban differences?
46
Safely treated off-site
• How much waste leaks out of sewers?
• How much faecal sludge from latrines and septic tanks is removed but not delivered to treatment plants?
• How much of what reaches a treatment plant is adequately treated?
47
Treatment ladder
48
H.a.1
H.b
H.a.2
H.a.3
SEEA
Challenges
• What is being tracked (populations, volumes)
• Safe disposal of on-site sanitation
• Scaling up: from cities to countries
• Integration of new sources of information
– Household surveys
– Administrative data
– Other (e.g. Earth observations)
49
Challenges
• Differences between global and local norms and definitions
• Limited data on safe management
– Can make estimates based on local information
– Can make estimates based on other factors
– Can make estimates with qualifications
– Can decline to make estimates
50
Discussion
• Are the proposed ladders appropriate for all countries?
• What challenges would using these ladders pose at the national or sub-national level?
51
