PILOTING NEW INDICATORS AND METHODOLOGIES TO MEASURE THE HUMAN RIGHT TO WATER IN NICARAGUA

Ó. Flores, R.Giné, A. Jiménez, A. Pérez-Foguet

Research Group on Cooperation and Human Development_Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Barcelona, Spain

10_04_13_IRC Symposium. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

OUTLINE

One/////Introduction. HRtW & monitoring

Two/////Context: case study

Three///Research design and methodology

Four////Results

Five/////Some implications for a country-wide monitoring

Six///// Conclusions & challenges

PURPOSE OF THE PAPER:

2_Preliminary ideas about… how to integrate new methodologies to measure and better understand the situation of marginalized members of society (United Nations, 2012)

INTRODUCTION

“States Parties have a core obligation to include methods, such as right to water indicators and benchmarks, by which progress (of the human right to water) can be closely monitored” (GC15, 2002)

1_Developing indicators to measure access to water (in rural areas) based on the human right to water (Flores et al, 2013)

One// Introduction

Two// Case study CONTEXT

San Sebastián de Yalí

Municipality

Jinotega Department (North-central

region)

6 districts // 75 rural communities

(22500 people)

402 km2.

Access to water (CAPS as service

provider vs. self provision)

METHODOLOGYThree// Sample design (1/3)

1_Discriminated people is hard to find: -> Methodology to find and characterize people

not served by communitarian systems: Each of the 75 communities was divided into two

subgroups of households

A_One subgroup is served by the water supply systems that are managed by

the CAPS

B_Self-provision, which is not managed by the CAPS.

2_Sample size determination for small populations (communities) is challenging -

precision of achieved results vs simplicity and costs- -> approach that produces

estimates with sufficient precision for use in local level decision-making (based on

exact confidence limits of binomial distribution corrected for finite populations) Gine and

Foguet (2013)

How?

1_UMAS – Minsa – NGDO - University

2_Community census “in situ” (if possible) and community map

3_Questionaires

Households surveys (CAPS vs NO CAPS)

Interview: members of the CAPS board

Mapping and audit systems managed by CAPS

Water Point Mapping (systems not managed by CAPS)

METHODOLOGYThree// Field work(2/3)

METHODOLOGYThree// Indicators (3/3)

Source (Flores et al., 2013). Improvements based on *Rietveld et al (2009) **Jiménez and Pérez-Foguet (2012).

The target (“JMP on track”) may be achieved but access to water as guaranteed by human rights remains unequally enjoyed by many. The focus on aggregate outcomes provides no particular incentive to reach marginalized groups. (United Nations, 2012)

When we consider the average in a community, the situation (problems) of those not connected to systems managed by CAPS is not “visualized”

But when we separate results, we can observe inequalities in access to water

RESULTSFour// Visualizing inequalities (1/2)

Evidence (of those self

provided)Explanation

New community-dwellersSometimes it is hard to get a new

conection (2000c$ Affordability?)

Because of distance or altitude

Sometimes technical aspects of systems discriminate some areas (and condenms them without too

many options)

They couldn’t pay or work for the project

Projects and/or community not always think about equity

RESULTSFour// Inequality and discrimination causes

Not interested in the project

People that have their own sources in which they trust

But also…

IMPLICATIONSFive// SIASAR_a country-led monitoring

1. Joint iniciative launched by governments of Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama

2. Supported by WSP-WB

3. Mainly focused on post-construction support / Coverage

4. 4 questionaries:

Community (general data about community + coverage WASH

The system: physical status of the system + something about service delivery

The service provider: performance

The support agent (UMAS)

1_According to the HRtWS, it is important to know about people (right holders’), and even more important those people that are discriminated)

2_When you go to a community -> (t, $)

SIASAR could be combined with other

sources of information for adressing

equality and non-discrimination:

SIASAR + a statistically

representative number of HH (CAPS /

self provision) ??

1. If we don’t think about minorities in the first step of monitoring cycle

(Initiation and planning), they won’t appear in the rest (data collection,

analysis & interpretation, communication, reflection & decision making,

taking action –Danert & Narkevic, 2013-)

2. Methodology is practical to locate those minority sectors within rural

communities that often do not benefit from the same services than the

others

Usefulness when identifying and characterizing them for equity-

oriented policies (human right to water)

CONCLUSIONSSix// Conclusions

A_Indicators and methodologies (equity and others)

It is necessary to develop research to cope with intra-household bias as information obtained at household level can differ depending on which member of the family is polled

It is necessary to know more about inequality and discrimination causes to propose remedial actions

To improve access to water indicators based on HRtWS (post-2015)

CHALLENGESSix// Challenges

B_Governance

From data to decision making (is always a challenge)

Most of actors don’t know what HRtWS means (UMAS, Central Government?)

Thanks for your attention

oscar.flores.baquero@upc.eduricard.gine@upc.edu

alejandrojfp @gmail.comagusti.perez@upc.edu

https://grecdh.upc.edu

10_04_13_IRC Symposium. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Self provision is not always worse than using systems managed by CAPS for all criteria

RESULTSFour// The importance of self provision (2/2)

Physical accessibility is considerably higher for self-providers

Self-providers Systems managed by CAPS

A lot of unprotected springs in the region

Water is distributed by a system of public standpipes in Las Lagunetas

Those not using systems (CAPS) have their own sources

They carry water from springs to their homes through hosepipes