WHAT IS GLAAS? The UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-water (GLAAS) monitors the inputs required to extend and sustain water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) systems and services. The components of the “enabling environment” include government policy and institutional frameworks; the volume, sources and targeting of investment; the human resource base; the nature of external assistance; and performance. GLAAS also analyses the factors associated with progress, or lack thereof, in order to identify drivers and bottlenecks, knowledge gaps, strengths, weaknesses and challenges, and priorities and successes, and to facilitate benchmarking across countries. KEY HIGHLIGHTS Between 1990 and 2010, over 2 billion people gained access to improved water sources and 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation. This demonstrates what countries can achieve with sustained commitment, adequate resources and effective implementation approaches. The GLAAS 2012 report shows, however, that in many countries policies and programmes under- emphasize adequate financing and human resource development to sustain the existing infrastructure and to expand access to sanitation, drinking- water and hygiene services. Financing is insufficient and the institutional capacity to absorb what is available is limited. The danger of slippage against the MDG target is real. In 2011, countries reported substantive political commitments to WASH, increasing funding allocations, and leadership and coordination among implementing agencies. The majority of countries have established transparent WASH service provision targets and have put in place supporting policies, and many monitor against these targets. Countries also confirm that the rights to water and sanitation are increasingly adopted in laws or policies. Accountability can be improved, as most countries do not include consumers in planning and only half have established regular review processes. The total amount of development aid for sanitation and water increased from 2008 to 2010 to US$ 7.8 billion, along with a notable increase in non- concessional lending for sanitation and water. Despite these efforts, most countries are falling short on meeting their own national WASH commitments, with over 70% of countries reportedly falling significantly behind the trends required to meet their defined national access targets for sanitation and drinking-water. POLITICAL WILL AND ACCOUNTABILITY: There is growing political will for WASH implementation, as expressed in new efforts to be more accountable and to plan and coordinate more effectively. Is the right to water explicitly recognized in policy or law? Nearly 80% of countries recognize the right to water, and over 50% the right to sanitation Countries report strong progress in adopting and publishing WASH sector policies Sanitation Drinking-water 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % of countries with agreed and published sector policy 2011 2011 2009 2009 UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water THE CHALLENGE OF EXTENDING AND SUSTAINING SERVICES 2012 REPORT Despite progress on setting targets and establishing policies, output is insufficient to meet national targets 93% 70% 22% 30% 0% 100% Targets in place Policies adopted Perceived adequate finance Annual progress >75% or more to meet target % of countries reporting attainment Despite the global financial crisis, external support for WASH increased from 2008 to 2010 7.6 2.5 7.8 4.4 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 ODA non-concessional lending $US billion 2008 2010 HIGH- LIGHTS
Transcript
WHAT IS GLAAS?The UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-water (GLAAS) monitors the inputs required to extend and sustain water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) systems and services. The components of the “enabling environment” include government policy and institutional frameworks; the volume, sources and targeting of investment; the human resource base; the nature of external assistance; and performance. GLAAS also analyses the factors associated with progress, or lack thereof, in order to identify drivers and bottlenecks, knowledge gaps, strengths, weaknesses and challenges, and priorities and successes, and to facilitate benchmarking across countries.
KEY HIGHLIGHTS Between 1990 and 2010, over 2 billion people gained access to improved water sources and 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation. This demonstrates what countries can achieve with sustained commitment, adequate resources and effective implementation approaches. The GLAAS 2012 report shows, however, that in many countries policies and programmes under- emphasize adequate financing and human resource development to sustain the existing infrastructure and to expand access to sanitation, drinking-water and hygiene services. Financing is insufficient and the institutional capacity to absorb what is available is limited. The danger of slippage against the MDG target is real.
In 2011, countries reported substantive political commitments to WASH, increasing funding allocations, and leadership and coordination among implementing agencies. The majority of countries have established transparent WASH service provision targets and have put in place supporting policies, and many monitor against these targets. Countries also confirm that the rights to water and sanitation are increasingly adopted in laws or policies. Accountability can be improved, as most countries do not include consumers in planning and only half have established regular review processes. The total amount of
development aid for sanitation and water increased from 2008 to 2010 to US$ 7.8 billion, along with a notable increase in non-concessional lending for sanitation and water.
Despite these efforts, most countries are falling short on meeting their own national WASH commitments, with over 70% of countries reportedly falling significantly behind the trends required to meet their defined national access targets for sanitation and drinking-water.
POLITICAL WILL AND ACCOUNTABILITY: There is growing political will for WASH implementation, as expressed in new efforts to be more accountable and to plan and coordinate more effectively.
Is the right to water explicitly recognized in policy or law?
Nearly 80% of countries recognize the right to water, and over 50% the right to sanitation
Countries report strong progress in adopting and publishing WASH sector policies
Sanitation
Drinking-water
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100% of countries with agreed and published sector policy
Trend from 2009 to 2011 (38 countries)
2011
2011
2009
2009
UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water
THE CHALLENGE OF EXTENDING AND SUSTAINING SERVICES
2012 REPORT
Despite progress on setting targets and establishing policies, output is insufficient to meet national targets
93%
70%
22%30%
0%
100%
Targets in place Policies adopted Perceived adequate �nance
Annual progress >75% or moreto meet target
% o
f cou
ntrie
sre
port
ing
atta
inm
ent
7.6
2.5
7.8
4.4
0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.09.0
ODA non-concessional lending
$US
billi
on
20082010
Despite the global financial crisis, external support for WASH increased from 2008 to 2010
93%
70%
22%30%
0%
100%
Targets in place Policies adopted Perceived adequate �nance
Annual progress >75% or moreto meet target
% o
f cou
ntrie
sre
port
ing
atta
inm
ent
7.6
2.5
7.8
4.4
0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.08.09.0
ODA non-concessional lending
$US
billi
on
20082010
HIGH-
LIGHTS
– Highlights
DOMESTIC FINANCING: There is insufficient domestic financing for WASH overall, with particularly serious shortfalls for sanitation. This is exacerbated by difficulties in spending the limited funds that are received.
SUSTAINABILITY: There is a risk of slippage on progress made unless sufficient financial and human resource support is given to sustain operation and maintenance.
Sanitation, adequacy of financing, 2011
Are financial flows sufficient to meet MDG targets?
Sanitation funding remains inadequate
Average absorption rates of central government capital commitments are low
Governments report that 31% of WASH funding is allocated to support operation and
maintenance of services
Data suggest that less than 10% of external aid is directed towards maintenance of existing services.
One-third of countries indicate that revenues cover less than 80% of operating costs for urban utilities.
Most countries report insufficient staff to operate and maintain urban and rural drinking-water systems
Sanitation, absorption of committed domestic funds, 2011
What is the percentage of domestic capital commitments utilized?
Urban
Rural75%
25% Sanitation and drinking-water
Hygiene
69%
31% Capital expenditure
Operation and maintenance expenditure
27%
73%
Sanitation
Drinking-water
2%
98%
Is there sufficient staff to operate and maintain urban and rural drinking-water systems?
Yes, sufficient to meetdemand
Yes, but insufficient tomeet demand
No
Num
ber o
f cou
ntrie
s Urban drinking-waterRural drinking-water
27
40
2 11
51
7
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
New servicesMaintain/replace existing servicesIncrease service or treatment levels57%
7%
36%
34%
24%
42%
Operating ratio greater than 1.2
Operating ratio between 0.8 and 1.2
Operating ratio less than 0.8
– Highlights
TARGETING OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES
Targeting of external support for WASH can be further improved to assist those most in need
50% of sanitation and drinking-water aid is targeted to the sub-Saharan Africa, Southern Asia and South-eastern Asia MDG regions, those parts of the world where 70% of the unserved live
Aid for basic sanitation and drinking-water services increased from 16% to 26% of overall sanitation and water aid commitments between 2008 and 2010
Funds are largely targeted for extending services in urban areas
Drinking-water continues to receive the majority of WASH funding
Domestic WASH funding can be made more equitable
Drinking-water continues to absorb the majority of WASH funding, even in countries with relatively high drinking-water supply coverage and relatively low sanitation coverage. Countries also indicate that expenditures are largely targeted
for extending services in urban areas, even in countries where urban areas are relatively well served and rural areas are off-track.
Urban
Rural75%
25% Sanitation and drinking-water
Hygiene
69%
31% Capital expenditure
Operation and maintenance expenditure
27%
73%
Sanitation
Drinking-water
2%
98%
Urban
Rural75%
25% Sanitation and drinking-water
Hygiene
69%
31% Capital expenditure
Operation and maintenance expenditure
27%
73%
Sanitation
Drinking-water
2%
98%
Northern Africa
Southern Asia
Latin America and CaribbeanSub-Saharan Africa
Western Asia
Eastern Asia
Oceania
South-eastern Asia
Caucasus and Central AsiaDeveloped countriesNot applicable
NOTE: An additional 7% of global sanitation and water ODA is targeted to regional programmes
Hygiene education Water resources, rivers, waste management Policy and administration Large systems Basic systems Other
0 500 1000 1500 2000
United KingdomRepublic of Korea
Asian DevelopmentBank
Netherlands
African DevelopmentBank
EU InstitutionsSpain
FranceUnited States
World Bank (IDA)Germany
Japan
Average annual commitments to sanitation and drinking-water, 2008–2010(US$ millions, constant 2009 $US)
– Highlights
The use of periodic reviews to monitor and evaluate the performance of sanitation and drinking-water uptake and services is increasingly used by countries as a basis for planning. However, the lack of robust data is a potentially major constraint to progress.
• Half the countries did not report on access to adequate sanitation in schools or health-care facilities, suggesting a lack of monitoring systems and capacity.
• Despite clear country responses indicating insufficient staff in water and sanitation services, only half of countries were able to provide data for staff in place and one third could anticipate staffing needs.
• To strengthen the collection of WASH financial information, a harmonized method of data monitoring is needed.
For further information: www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/glaas or [email protected]
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted and dashed lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement.
MONITORING AND EVALUATION: Improved monitoring is required to generate the information for evidence-based decision making.
Periodic sector reviews are being increasingly used in sanitation planning.
Countries report that only 42% of urban/rural sanitation and drinking-water sectors are informed by
reliable information monitoring systems
Half of respondent countries fail to monitor against established targets for school sanitation
Two-thirds of countries could not report on Improved drinking-water coverage in health-care centres
What percentage of health-care facilities have improved water supplies?
≥90%
75–89%
50–74%
<50%
Not a survey participant
Data not available
Not applicable
What percentage of health-care facilities have improved water supplies?
≥90%
75–89%
50–74%
<50%
Not a survey participant
Data not available
Not applicable
What percentage of health-care facilities have improved water supplies?
≥90%
75–89%
50–74%
<50%
Not a survey participant
Data not available
Not applicable
What percentage of health-care facilities have improved water supplies?
≥90%
75–89%
50–74%
<50%
Not a survey participant
Data not available
Not applicable
Yes and used Under development No
42%
42%
16%
Urban sanitationRural sanitation
35
24
12
34
26
11
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Targets included andmonitored
Targets, but not monitored No targets or strategyfor schools
Num
ber o
f cou
ntrie
s
What percentage of health-care facilities have improved water supplies?
≥90%
75–89%
50–74%
<50%
Not a survey participant
Data not available
Not applicable
The 2012 UN-Water GLAAS report presents data received from 74 developing countries, covering all the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) regions, and from 24 external support agencies (ESAs), representing approximately 90% of official development assistance (ODA) for sanitation and drinking-water.
The 2012 report draws on the latest information, including data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Creditor Reporting System (CRS), and data gathered through two sets of questionnaires: one for low- and middle-income countries and one for ESAs. These questionnaires have allowed countries and donors to score their progress and WASH inputs according to objective criteria. While the responses are based on consensus from multiple national stakeholders and are subject to validation, it is acknowledged that the accuracy of responses will show variability. Thus, to some extent, the responses should be interpreted as a self-assessment of country and donor priorities.
Is there a national information system used to inform decision-making?
