Post on 21-Jan-2019
transcript
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Oliver Schmoll
Federal Environment AgencyBad Elster, Germany
Meeting the MDGs and access to safe water:the case of Tajikistan
Koblenz, 8 December 2009
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Technology access as progress indicator
“Halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water …”
“Measurement” or progress throughWHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP)
Key assumptions: • Certain technologies better protect health than others
(e.g. better infrastructures, better resource protection)• “Improved” and “unimproved” technologies
Source:UNICEF and WHO 2008
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
JMP 2006 assessment
Source:UNICEF and WHO 2008 CISWorld
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
JMP 2006 global coverage data
20062002
20062002
20062002
Year
3342
3018
3740
Total
4253
77Unimproved
3521
1211Other improved
2326
8182
Piped into dwelling, yard or plot
RuralUrbanTAJIKISTAN
Source:UNICEF and WHO 2008
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkDisrupted or non-functioning infrastructures
Rayon Water supply Numerator Workingcondition
Servingcapacity
Khatlon Oblast 258 152 994.908Qabadiyan УВК Кабадиян МКХ РТ 1 1 5.320
С-з 50 лет СССР уч. Хает 1 1 3.100С-з 50 лет СССР уч. Большевик 1 1 3.120С-з 50 лет СССР уч. Чаркурган 1 0 3.220К-з Околтин уч. Янгиюль 1 1 5.000К-з Чкалова 1 0 5.148К-з Навои уч. Калинин 1 1 4.526К-з Шахоб уч. Ленин 1 1 4.369К-з Коммунизм уч. Центр 1 0 5.414К-з Коммунизм уч. Социализм 1 0 4.200К-з Гулистон 1 0 5.206К-з Пахтакор уч. Истиклолият 1 0 14.534к-з Тельман уч. Горький 1 0 15.646к-з Бобогулов уч. Бештемир 1 0 7.110Sub-total: 14 6 85.913
22 % of p
iped supplies
are
not in “working co
ndition”
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkDisrupted or non-functioning infrastructures
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkLack of electricity and intermitted supply
Kulyab: 92,000 inhabitants
80 % deep groundwater wells
“Power rationing” of 2 months(February/March 2009):
Source: Oxfam 2009
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkLack of electricity and intermitted supply
Source: Oxfam 2009
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkLack of electricity and intermitted supply
Kulyab: 92,000 inhabitants
80 % deep groundwater wells
“Power rationing” of 2 months(Feb/March 2009):• Collection time: more than 2 hrs/d • Collection distance: up to 3 km • Volumes: 40 litre for personal use
Expected health impacts: • Lack of hygiene (flush toilets!)• Carry of heavy loads• Miss of school• Harassment
Source: Oxfam 2009
Common phenomenon in Tajik
istan
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkDisease outbreaks
Frequent typhoid fever outbreaks reported since mid 1990ies
Two major outbreaks in southern provinces with > 7,500 cases (1996)
Several major outbreaks in Dushanbe with• > 10,900 cases and 108 deaths (1996/1997)• > 500 cases and 3 deaths (2002)• > 2,000 cases (2003)
Ongoing endemic in several locations
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkDisease outbreaks in Dushanbe
Tap waterVarzob river(raw water)
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkAnalysis of disease outbreaks in Dushanbe
Overflow from old and poorly maintained sewage systems after heavy rainfalls into source
Simple treatment (sedimentation & filtration):• Aged and poorly maintained
infrastructure• Turbidity 7-15 NTU
(during outbreak 1997)• TTC > 150 cfu/100 ml
(during outbreak 1997)• 33 % positive E. coli analysis
(2004)• Shortage of chlorine
Distribution has high potential for cross contamination and back-siphonage:• Low and intermittent pressure is
common• Many buildings have booster
pumps causing negative pressure• Non-standard connections from
mains• Pipes run inside storm drains
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkDrinking-water quality surveillance
Poor personal and technical resources of state surveillance agencies (in rural areas)
Systematic routine surveillance is not existent or not functioning
Non-representative surveillance findings:• Biased to urban areas• Random data
Data are not ready for analysis:• Scattered between institutions• Varying structures and formats• Outdated
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkRapid Assessment of Drinking Water Quality 2005
Provision of statistical representative snapshot:• Provision of baseline information on water quality• Assessment of compliance with standards or guidelines• Assessment of public health risks to the population
Rapid procedures:• One-off exercise• Limited time-span
Cluster sampling strategy
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkRADWQ study coverage
RRS & DushanbeClusters: 15Utility piped supplies: 506Protected springs: 108Households: 60
GBAOClusters: 7Utility piped supplies: 24Protected springs: 63Households: 15
KhatlonClusters: 16Utility piped supplies: 346Protected springs: 103Households: 40
SughdClusters: 15Utility piped supplies: 410Protected springs: 46Households: 45
nTJK = 1.720
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkCritical parameter approach
Appearance
Conductivity
Iron
Nitrate
Arsenic
Fluoride
Thermotolerant coliforms
Turbidity
pH
Chlorine residuals
Physical and chemicalMicrobial and related
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkUse of sanitary inspections
Water quality analysis:• Details on current conditions
Sanitary inspections:• Powerful on-site risk assessment tool• Information on immediate/ongoing
risks and their causes
PROTECTED SPRINGI General informationa. WSS No:………………………………..b. Community Name……………………...c. Date of visit: …………………………...d.Water sample - TTC/100ml …………..
II Specific Diagnostic Information for Assessment Risk1. Is the spring unprotected? Y/N2. Is the masonry protecting the spring faulty Y/N3. Is the backfill area eroded? Y/N4. Does spilt water flood the collection area? Y/N5. Is the area around the spring unfenced? Y/N6. Can animals have access within 10m of the spring? Y/N7. Is there a latrine within 30m and uphill of the spring? Y/N8. Does surface water collect uphill of the spring? Y/N9. Is the diversion ditch absent or faulty? Y/N10. Are there nay other sources of pollution uphill of the spring Y/N(e.g. solid waste, animal kraal etc)?
Total risk score /10Results and commentsSignature of inspector
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkAssessment of overall compliance
73 %
73 %
33 %
91 %
78 %
TJKSTD
82 %
78 %
58 %
94 %
86 %
WHOGV
334
63
60
103
108
No.
Protectedsprings
62 %
67 %
45 %
61 %
78 %
TJKSTD
88 %
67 %
86 %
85 %
93 %
WHOGV
66 %87 %1,6201,286TAJ
71 %75 %8724G.B.A.O.
43 %82 %470410Sughd
68 %87 %449346Khatlon
78 %92 %614506Dushanbe/RRS
TJKSTD
WHOGV
No.No.
Total “improved”
Utility piped supplies
Area
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkWater quality and sanitary inspection grading
1.5 %4.5 %22.5 %71.5 %
Very high risk:urgent action
High risk:higher action priority
Intermediate risk:low action priority
Low risk:no action
00009-101115176-804502373-5261281,1590-2
> 10011-1001-10< 1
Thermotolerant coliform count(cfu/100ml)
SanitaryInspection
Score
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Reality checkSanitary risks identification
12 %Are there any other sources of pollution uphill of the spring?10
19 %Is the diversion ditch above the spring absent or non-functional?9
7 %Does surface water collect uphill of the spring?8
2 %Is there a latrine uphill and/or within 30 m of the spring?7
52 %Can animals have access within 10 m of the spring?6
63 %Is the fence absent or faulty?5
13 %Does spilt water flood the collection area?4
8 %Is the backfill area behind the retaining wall eroded?3
38 %Is the masonry protecting the spring faulty?2
44 %Is the spring unprotected?1
PROTECTED SPRINGS: 334 sites inspected
Koblenz8 December 2009
The case of Tajikistan
Conclusions
Water quality is an eye-catching issue in the European Region
Waterborne disease remains a major challenge
Access to “improved” sources does not necessarily equal to access to safe water
Continuity and reliability of “improved” supplies is challenged:• Aged and poorly maintained infrastructures• Irregular electricity supply• Lack of adequate treatment in response to source water quality
(incl. lack of chemicals)
Gap in routine drinking-water quality surveillance