Sanitation and Hygiene in Africa at a Glance€¦ · 2015, launched in June 2011. SANITATION STATUS...

Sanitation and Hygiene in Africa at a Glance

A synthesis of country priority actions

1



2011

A collaborative initiative by:African Ministers’ Council on Water (AMCOW)Water and Sanitation Program (WSP)UNICEFWaterAidCREPA

© AMCOW, WSP, UNICEF, WaterAid and CREPA – July 2011

Boxes, Maps, Tables and Figures as specified

All rights reserved. The publishing partners welcome requests for permission to reproduce or translate this publication, as long as the authors and publishing partners are duly credited.

The contents of this publication may be quoted with due credit to the authors and publishing partners, but may not be reproduced, all or in part, without express permission from one of the copyright holders.

AMCOW, WSP, UNICEF, WaterAid and CREPA do not warrant that the information contained in this publication is complete and correct and shall not be liable for any damages incurred as a result of its use.

The designation of geographical entities, use of any name in this publication, and the presentation of the material do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the publishing partners (AMCOW, WSP, UNICEF, WaterAid and CREPA) concerning the legal status of any country or territory, or area of its authority, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Note: Some of the maps that were prepared before July 2011 do not reflect the new state of South Sudan.



2011

2 © W

ater

Aid

.Car

olin

e P

enn



3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................4

The AfricaSan movement .........................................................................................................5

Africa sub-Regions ..................................................................................................................6

Progress towards the MDG sanitation target ............................................................................7

Priority Actions for Africa .........................................................................................................8

How to use this document .......................................................................................................11

WESTERN AFRICASanitation coverage trends ......................................................................................................14

Sanitation coverage, Western Africa countries, 2008 ................................................................14

Western Africa eThekwini monitoring ........................................................................................15

Priority Actions for Western Africa ...........................................................................................16

Western Africa CSO2 Summary ...............................................................................................18

EASTERN AFRICASanitation coverage trends ......................................................................................................20

Sanitation coverage, Eastern Africa countries, 2008 .................................................................20

Eastern Africa eThekwini monitoring .........................................................................................21

Priority Actions for Eastern Africa ............................................................................................22

Eastern Africa CSO2 Summary ................................................................................................24

SOUTHERN AFRICASanitation coverage trends ......................................................................................................26

Sanitation coverage, Southern Africa countries, 2008 ...............................................................26

Southern Africa eThekwini monitoring ......................................................................................27

Priority Actions for Southern Africa ..........................................................................................28

Southern Africa CSO2 Summary ..............................................................................................30

CENTRAL AFRICASanitation coverage trends ......................................................................................................32

Sanitation coverage, Central Africa countries, 2008 ..................................................................32

Central Africa eThekwini monitoring .........................................................................................33

Priority Actions for Central Africa .............................................................................................34

Central Africa CSO2 Summary .................................................................................................36

EXISTING CAPACITY AND STRENGTHS ..................................................................... 37

ANNEXESAnnex 1 - JMP data tables for Africa ........................................................................................41

Annex 1 – eThekwini indicators, definitions and scoring criteria .................................................42

4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This synthesis report was commissioned by the African Ministers’ Council on Water (AMCOW) Task Force on Sanitation, and developed through

a collaborative initiative by the Water and Sanitation Program (WSP), UNICEF, the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council (WSSCC), WaterAid and CREPA.

The in-country process was conceptualized by the eThekwini Monitoring Sub-group, which also reviewed the synthesis report. The eThekwini Monitoring Sub-group comprises a team from WSP: Yolande Coombes and Sophie Hickling; UNICEF: Therese Dooley, Ann Thomas and Jane Bevan; WaterAid: Yunia Musaazi, Yael Velleman and Ian Ross; CREPA: Idrissa Doucoure and Cyrille Amegnran; and, WSSCC - Archana Patkar and Saskia Castelein.

In-country meetings of sector actors were convened by WSP, UNICEF, WaterAid and CREPA, with roles assigned according to the individual country. eThekwini monitoring data and country priority actions were generated during these meetings and validated by each individual country. The contributions of the many individuals who actively participated in the country meetings are acknowledged.

Data presentations from the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation report (2010) were specifically developed for this synthesis report by Rolf Luyendijk (UNICEF).

Overall compilation of this synthesis report was undertaken by Sophie Hickling (consultant) and task managed by Yolande Coombes (WSP).

The French translations were managed by Sylvia Amisi (consultant), and editorial coordination was overseen by Toni Sittoni (WSP) and Sylvia Maina (consultant). The report was designed by Eric Lugaka.

African Ministerial Council on Water (AMCOW)

Launched in Abuja, Nigeria, on April 30, 2002, by African Ministers responsible for water, the African Ministerial Council on Water (AMCOW) has the overall objective of encouraging new approaches to Africa’s development challenges, and the regional, intergovernmental responses essential for translating the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) on water and sanitation into reality in Africa. AMCOW provides leadership, policy direction and advocacy for the sustainable social and economic development of water resources.



5

THE AFRICASAN MOVEMENT

The first African conference on sanitation and hygiene (AfricaSan) took place1 in 2002 with the overall goal to accelerate sanitation and hygiene

work in Africa in fulfilment of the MDGs. Attended by over 150 decision-makers, including 12 ministers, from over 20 African countries, the conference focused on technical exchanges, made recommendations on good practices and issued a political statement. AfricaSan influenced the adoption of a specific sanitation MDG target by the international community at the World Summit on Sustainable Development later that year.

AfricaSan+52, attended by ministers from 32 African countries and over 600 participants from 42 African countries, provided an important platform in 2008, the International Year of Sanitation, to stimulate action to improve sanitation access in Africa. The conference produced a Ministerial statement, called the eThekwini Declaration which makes important commitments by African governments to improve sanitation by 2010 and to get African countries on track to meet the sanitation MDG. Seventeen countries became signatories of these commitments, and others have signed them retrospectively. The eThekwini declaration was subsequently endorsed by Heads of State at the AU Summit, 2008 in the Sharm el Sheikh Declaration and has been reaffirmed through various regional and sub-regional declarations such as the Libreville Declaration on Health and Environment in Africa. AMCOW has the mandate to report back on progress against these commitments (see eThekwini Monitoring in this document).

Globally, three significant initiatives are affecting the drive towards improving sanitation: the International Year of Sanitation 2008 provided an opportunity for increased advocacy for sanitation; Sanitation and Water for All (SWA), launched in 2010, to bring sanitation and water issues to world leaders and Ministers of Finance; and the General Assembly resolution (65/153) which established the Sustainable Sanitation: 5-year drive to 2015, launched in June 2011.

SANITATION STATUS IN AFRICADespite recent progress in sanitation, with increased investment and engagement, all but four countries in Sub-Saharan Africa remain off-track to meet the sanitation MDG. In 2008, 584million people in Africa did not have an improved sanitation facility, and of those 231million practised open defecation. Analysis

of access by socio-economic status shows significant disparities with the richest 20 per cent of the population in Sub-Saharan Africa being five times more likely to use an improved sanitation facility than the poorest 20 per cent. The poorest are 18 times more likely to practise open defecation3.

COUNTRY PREPARATION MEETINGSThe overall objective of AfricaSan3 is to get Africa on track to meet the sanitation MDG. The event will focus on country action and sustaining momentum after the conference through improved action plans, renewed commitments, country-to-country peer support and technical assistance. To ensure that the conference and follow-up actions are needs-based and action-oriented Country Preparation Meetings were held to bring government and stakeholders together in a dialogue to identify needs. The meeting process was structured so that participants reviewed existing evidence regarding sanitation in their countries, including the JMP data (WHO / UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water and Sanitation), CSO2 reports (Second AMCOW Country Status Overview), existing sanitation action plans and other sector documents. Using this evidence, countries analysed where they stand in relation to previous action plans and commitments and, cognisant that not all needs can be addressed in parallel, used a consensus building exercise to identify three priority areas that need to be addressed by June 2013 to get their country on track to meet the sanitation MDG. At the same time participants at the meeting identified three strengths that they could offer as peer support to build capacity in other countries.

Multi-stakeholder country preparation meetings took place in 38 countries; 33 complete and endorsed country reports were submitted for inclusion in the regional synthesis report4.

1Hosted in Johannesburg by WSP, The South African then Department of Water Affairs and Forestry and WSSCC. 2Hosted in Durban by AMCOW, supported by AfDB, DWAF, UNICEF, UNSGAB, the World Bank, WSP and WSSCC3All data from A Snapshot of Drinking Water and Sanitation in Africa – 2010 Update, AMCOW 2010 in collaboration with WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation4Validation of meeting outputs by senior representatives of line ministries was a prerequisite for inclusion in the synthesis. Five additional countries submitted endorsed reports after the closing date; these countries appear in the all-Africa eThekwini monitoring report but not in the main body of the document.

6

Benin

Burkina Faso

Cape Verde

Côte d’Ivoire

Gambia, The

Ghana

Guinea Bissau

Guinea

Algeria

Egypt

Libya

Mauritania**

Morocco

Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic

Tunisia

Northern Western

Liberia

Mali

Niger

Nigeria

Senegal

Sierra Leone

Togo

Burundi

Comoros

Djibouti

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Kenya

Rwanda

Somalia***

Sudan

South Sudan

Tanzania

Uganda

Eastern

Angola

Botswana

Lesotho

Madagascar

Malawi

Mauritius

Mozambique

Namibia

South Africa

Swaziland

Zambia

Zimbabwe

Southern

Cameroon

Central African Republic

Chad

Congo, Dem. Rep. of

Congo, Rep. of

Equatorial Guinea

Gabon

São Tomé and Principe

Central

AFRICA SUB - REGIONS

**In North Africa, Mauritania was the only country to have convened an AfricaSan3 Country Preparation Meeting. Owing to this and with the permission of the national team, for the purposes of this document Mauritania data has been included in the West Africa Region.

***Somalia: It was not possible to hold national consultation meetings in Somalia due to the ongoing conflict in the country.

One semi-autonomous state in the NE of the country (Puntland) was able to hold consultations and due to the relative peace in that state, it is willing and able to implement activities to scale up sanitation in the state. Results from the Puntland state consultation are included in all Africa eThekwini Monitoring to give an indication of the status of Sanitation in Somalia although they may not be completely representative of the whole country.



7

Progress towards the MDG sanitation target

Nine countries in Africa are on track for meeting the MDG sanitation target

On track: Coverage rate in 2008 >95%, or was within 5 per cent of the 2008 rate required to meet the MDG target

Progress but insufficient: Coverage rate in 2008 was between 5 per cent and 10 per cent below the 2008 rate required to meet the MDG target

Not on track:Coverage rate in 2008 was the same or lower than the rate in 1990 or more than 10 per cent below the 2008 rate required to meet the MDG target,No or insufficient data: Data were unavailable or insufficient to estimate trends

80

100

Only Northern Africa already surpassed its MDG sanitation target – all other regions are set to miss it.

Northern Africa86

89

MDG targets

40

60

Cov

erag

e (%

)

Africa

Southern Africa 5961

6872

64

41

50

MDG targets

0

20

201520081990

Central Africa

Western Africa

Eastern Africa

27

Current trendTrend needed to meet the MDG target

PROGRESS TOWARDS THE MDG SANITATION TARGET

Only Northern Africa already surpassed its MDG sanitation target – all other regions are set to miss it.

60

80

100

over

age

(%)

Northern Africa86

6872

64

89

MDG targets

20

40

60

Co

Central Africa

Africa

Southern Africa

Western Africa

Eastern Africa

5961

27

41

50

0201520081990

Current trendTrend needed to meet the MDG target

8

The word cloud above generated from combined priority actions clearly shows several themes that are common across many countries:

capacity building, financial resource mobilisation, strategy implementation, scale-up and monitoring and evaluation.

Capacity building as a theme is broad and fairly equally spread between capacity building centrally, of new or existing sanitation departments, and decentralised capacity building of district and commune teams, local leader and actors. There is limited country experience of effective capacity building with few counties noting it as a strength. Those that do note capacity building as a strength specifically mention embedding capacity building into sector strategies and action plans.

Financial resource mobilisation as a priority is a theme that aligns with review of the eThekwini monitoring where advances in budget allocations for sanitation have not reached the 0.5% GDP target. Financial mobilisation and increased allocations to sanitation budgets is also prioritised in several countries by the CSO2 (mainly in West Africa). It should be noted that improved management of existing financial resources through for example, planning, targeting, tracking are of equal importance. Countries that noted financial issues as a strength, mentioned management through SWAp, development of information and budget tracking systems and financing mechanisms through credit schemes or cross subsidy.

PRIORITY ACTIONS FOR AFRICA

8



9

Prioritisation of strategy implementation also resonates across several countries. In the CSO2 also, developing new or implementing existing strategies and actions plans were common recommendations. Review of the eThekwini monitoring reveals that, in most regions the majority of countries already have an endorsed policy and a comprehensive action plan. The short-term focus should therefore be on ensuring that existing policies, strategies and action plans are operationalized at all levels. There is considerable experience available in this area with several countries noting policy, strategy and action plans as a strength.

An emerging theme from country priority actions is to move from identification and piloting of new approaches to applying those approaches at the scale required

to make progress against MDG targets. West Africa country preparation meetings and CSO2 priorities specifically mention scale up of the CLTS approach for several countries. A number of countries note that they have experience in CLTS and CLTS scale-up.

Establishment of effective monitoring and evaluation systems at all levels, and development of tracking tools is another clear priority action area from both country preparations and eThekwini monitoring. Countries that noted monitoring and evaluation amongst their strengths to share mentioned making M+E an important part of strategic planning, reconciliation of national and global data and community involvement in M+E.

9

10 © U

NIC

EF



11

HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT

WORD CLOUDSA word cloud is a visual representation of text data that can be used to quickly perceive the most prominent terms by enlarging the terms according to the frequency with which they appear in the text. The larger the text, the more frequent the term.

Taken from the results of the country preparation meetings in each region (or all countries on pages 8-9), the word cloud shows the commonly occurring themes that need to be addressed by June 2013 to get countries on track to meet the sanitation MDG.

The word cloud is followed by a short description of the types of issue countries mentioned under the 3-4 emerging key themes and a table summarising all priorities from individual countries in the region.

ETHEKWINI MONITORINGThe eThekwini Declaration, produced at AfricaSan+5, makes important commitments by African governments to improve sanitation by 2010. The commitments were quite broad and based on a range of priority actions identified to help countries get back on track to meet the sanitation MDG. After AfricaSan+5 efforts were made to develop commitment indicators and criteria with which to measure them. These indicators and criteria were the basis of in-country review and validation of progress against eThekwini commitments during preparation meetings. Results are presented in this document and constitute the first official all-Africa review. The full list of indicators and criteria can be found in Annex 2.

The “traffic light” analysis allows for rapid identification of areas of good progress (green), some progress

(yellow) and no progress (red). The horizontal scores shown allow for comparison between commitments and identification of trends in progress.

Note: The all–Africa eThekwini monitoring includes several countries that are not included in regional analyses due to delays in submission of signed reports.

CSO2For each country and subsector, the second AMCOW Country Status Overview (CSO2) explores the links between inputs (finance) and outcomes (coverage) through the lens of a ‘service delivery pathway’, to identify the major barriers that still constrain performance in each subsector.

The CSO2 Scorecard is an assessment framework allowing identification of drivers and barriers in the ‘service delivery pathway’ of each sub-sector. The scorecards assess three pillars of the service delivery pathway: enabling, developing, sustaining.

Each building block of service delivery is assessed in turn, against specific indicators and scored. Scores are generated with reference to a range of specific questions and a simple colour code allows problem building blocks (barriers) to be easily identified. CSO2 scorecard colour code building blocks that are largely in place, acting as

a driver on service delivery building blocks that are a drag on service delivery

and require attention building blocks that are inadequate, constituting a

barrier to service delivery and a priority for reform

National policy

Sector policy

Lead agency for sanitation

Aid coordination

Investment plan

Annual review

Adequacy

Structure

Comprehensive

Policy

Planning

Budget

Enabling

Pillar Building block Evidence

12

Donor funds utilised

Domestic funds utilised

Reported

Local participation

Budget allocation criteria

Analysis of equity

Subsidy

Promotion

Reporting

Supply-chain

Private sector capacity

Private sector development

Quantity

Quality

Hand-washing

Sub-sector progress

Consistent definitions

Quality of facilities

Expenditure

Equity

Output

Markets

Uptake

Use

Developing

Sustaining

Priority actions: The report builds on the insights from the CSO2 Scorecard to provide managers in the sector and their development partners with guidance on prioritizing reform and investment options that match stages of subsector evolution in each country.

The scorecard concentrates on a linear progression and therefore in general, priorities have to be more in the enabling and developing pillars as the foundations for long term sustainability.

At country level, review of the CSO2 document can give more detail and analysis of the specific issues affecting countries.

JMPThe WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation (JMP) provides estimates of access to sanitation using the MDG indicator (proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility, urban and rural).

Improved sanitation

Use of the following facilities:

Flush or pour flush to:

• Piped sewer system

• Septic tank

• Pit latrine

Ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrine

Pit latrine with slab

Composting toilet

Unimproved sanitation

Use of the following facilities:

Flush or pour-flush to elsewhere (that is, not to a piped sewer system, septic tank or pit latrine)

Pit latrine without slab / open pit

Bucket

Hanging toilet or hanging latrine

Shared facilities of any type

No facilities, bush or field

Because definition of improved sanitation facilities can vary within and among countries and regions, and because JMP is mandated to report at global level and across time, JMP has defined a set of categories for “improved” and “unimproved” sanitation facilities that are used to analyse the national data on which the MDG trends and estimates are based.

An improved sanitation facility is one that hygienically separates human excreta from human contact.

These categories and the population estimates (including the proportion of the population living in urban and rural areas) used in the report are those estimates by the United Nations Population Division, 2008 revision. The estimates used by JMP may differ to those used by national governments. Estimates in the report may therefore differ from national estimates.Importantly, the JMP measure use rather than coverage.

13

© U

N P

hoto

.Ky

Chu

ng

1 Benin

2 Burkina Faso

3 Cape Verde

4 Côte d’Ivoire

5 Gambia, The

6 Ghana

7 Guinea- Bissau

8 Guinea

9 Liberia

10 Mauritania**

11 Mali

12 Niger

13 Nigeria

14 Senegal

15 Sierra Leone

16 Togo

WESTERN AFRICA

14

WESTERN AFRICA

Nigeria, 33.0Niger, 11.7Burkina Faso, 9.7Cote d'Ivoire, 5.6Benin, 5.1Ghana, 4.8Togo, 3.5Senegal, 2.3Guinea, 2.2Mali, 2.0Liberia, 1.8Mauritania, 1.7Sierra Leone, 1.3Guinea-Bissau, 0.5Cape Verde, 0.3Gambia, 0.1

0

20

40

60

80

100

Cov

erag

e (%

)

2015 2008 1990

Western Africa Sanitation coverage trends, Western Africa,1990 – 2008

Improved facilities

Shared facilities

Open Defecation

Unimproved facilities

1990 2008 1990 2008 1990 2008

27

29

17

35

20

27

21 24

36

35

19

10

38

16

11

43 47

20 23

35

13 14

24 16

Urban Rural Total

Niger 11.7 million

Nigeria 33.0 million

86 million people in Western Africa practised open defecation in 2008

(millions)

Sanitation coverage, Western African countries ,2008

Western Africa is not on track to meet the MDG sanitation target

The population without sanitation increased by 80 million since 1990

Population without improved sanitation, 1990 and 2008

Cov

erag

e (%

)

64

27 27

40

94 82

132

0

50

100

150

Urban Rural

(mill

ions

)

19902008

67

36

51

13

19

32

13

23

27

21

54

17

26

12

12

11

9

4

16

19

20

22

22

24

27

29

31

42

49

53

55

60

64

79

0 20 40 60 80 100

Gambia

Mali

Senegal

Ghana

Guinea

Nigeria

Sierra Leone

Cote d'Ivoire

REGIONAL AVERAGE

Guinea-Bissau

Cape Verde

Liberia

Mauritania

Togo

Benin

Burkina Faso

Niger

Coverage (%)

Improved Shared Unimproved Open defecation

Burkina Faso 9.7 million

15

Overall the monitoring process in West Africa presents a very positive picture of progress against the eThekwini Commitments on Sanitation. Notable achievements in ensuring the following commitments are met include:

• To establish, review, update and adopt national sanitation and hygiene policies

• To establish one national plan for accelerating progress to meet national sanitation goals and the MDGs by 2015.

• To increase the profile of sanitation in Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers and other relevant strategy related processes.

• To ensure that one, principal, accountable institution takes clear leadership of the national sanitation portfolio.

Other areas of sound progress include the following commitments:

• To establish one coordinating body with specific responsibility for sanitation and hygiene, involving all stakeholders.

• To establish specific public sector budget allocations for sanitation and hygiene programmes.

• To recognize the gender and youth aspects of sanitation and hygiene.

However, areas that warrant greater focus are apparent. Across the region there has been less progress in ensuring the following eThekwini commitments are met:

• Budget allocations should be a minimum of 0.5% GDP

• To develop and implement sanitation information, monitoring systems and tools to track progress at local and national levels

Is there a national sanitation policy?

Is there one national sanitation plan to meet the MDG target?

What profile is given to sanitation within the PRSP?

Is there a principal accountable institution to take leadership?

Is there one coordinating body involving all stakeholders?

Is there a specific public sector budget line for sanitation?

Is 0.5% of GDP allocated to sanitation?

Is there a sanitation monitoring and evaluation (M+E) system?

Do Institutional sanitation programs include gender aspects?

Ben

in

Bur

kina

Fas

o

Cap

e Ve

rde

Cô

te d

’Ivo

ire

Gam

bia

, T

he

Gha

na

Gui

nea-

Bis

sau

Gui

nea

Lib

eria

Mau

rita

nia

Mal

i

Nig

er

Nig

eria

Sen

egal

Sie

rra

Leo

ne

Tog

o

Tota

l /30

2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 25

2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 26

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 26

1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 25

2 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 23

1 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 22

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 4

1 2 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 2 1 0 13

0 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 23

WESTERN AFRICA ETHEKWINI MONITORING

16

PRIORITY ACTIONS FOR WESTERN AFRICA

FINANCING: More than half of countries that undertook country preparation meetings mentioned financing as a priority, in most cases financial resource mobilisation both internally and through external development partners. Other aspects of financing that were prioritised included investment planning in The Gambia, Sierra Leone and Togo and improving budget utilisation rates in The Gambia.

CAPACITY BUILDING: Half of all the countries noted capacity building as a priority. Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger specifically mention prioritising strengthening of decentralised capacity for planning, implementation and follow-up, including communes, local leaders, private sector and NGOs.

MONITORING AND EVALUATION: Monitoring and evaluation was another commonly occurring priority. Sierra Leone prioritised developing an effective and efficient monitoring and evaluation system, linked to the budget process at all levels. Mali have defined several key steps to putting in place their monitoring and evaluation system, including defining indicators, developing tools and carrying out trainings. In Guinea the priority is to put in place a community based information system.

CLTS SCALE-UP: Nigeria, Mali, Liberia and Guinea all mentioned scale-up of the CLTS approach as a priority action to get countries on track to meet the sanitation MDG.

Capacity building (DHAB, coordination at all levels, advisory role)

Strategy (implement, national scale, decentralised management)

Programme (develop, commune financing, sector regulation)

Financial (mobilise resources, social engineering)

Capacity building (local, implementation, follow-up, communes contracting, NGO/private sector supervision)

Capacity building (empowerment, transfer human + financial resources to communes)

Policy (development, consultative process, rural focus, on-site technology)

Scale (rural, disadvantaged areas, demand-led, CLTS)

Financial (mobilisation, internal, external)

Policy / Strategy (adoption, approval)

Finance (investment planning, local participation in investment planning, financial resource mobilisation, improve budget utilisation rates)

Finance (sustainable financing)

Capacity building

M+E

IEC

Benin

Burkina Faso

Côte d’Ivoire

Gambia, The

Ghana

COUNTRY PRIORITY ACTIONS (summarised)



17

Guinea

Liberia

Mali

Mauritania

Niger

Nigeria

Financial (advocacy)

Scale (advocacy)

Capacity building (national institutions)

Policy (update, adopt)

Strategy (define implementation strategy)

M+E (community based information sytem)

CLTS (scale-up)

Strategy / action plan (national sanitation roadmap, develop, implement)

Strategy (finalise, align with PRS2)

Intersectoral coordination (operationalize)

CLTS (scale-up)

M+E (system, indicators, logframe, targets, guidance, tools, training)

CLTS (scale-up)

Capacity building (skills transfer to communes, contrcats guidance, strategic planning methodology, support guide, training)

Hygiene and sanitation promotion (communication plan, tools, update capacity building plan)

Urban sanitation (construction of systems, Nouakchott and secondary towns)

Rural sanitation (construction, on-site, behaviour change)

Policy / strategy / action plan (implement)

Financial (mobilisation)

Financial (mobilisation, internal, external)

Capacity building (technical departments, local leaders, contracting, advocacy)

Strategy (popularisation, implementation)

Policy (harmonisation)

Leadership (identify)

Capacity building (implementers)

CLTS (scale-up)

Behaviour change (national campaign, school curricula, gender, capacity building, training, advocacy strategies for policymakers and households, sanitation week)

Financial (mobilisation, state budget, household contribution, advocacy strategy)

M+E (surveys, household expenditure surveys, socio-economic and health impacts)

Stategy

Finance (Investment planning, increase budget allocation)

M+E (effectiveness, link to budget, all levels)

Demand-led programs (CATS)

Private sector involvement (enabling environment)

Financial (strategic, investment plan, mobilisation)

Policy (adoption, implementation)

Decentralisation (implement process)

Senegal

Sierra Leone

Togo

Guinea-Bissau

18

Rural Sanitation and Hygiene Scorecard

Urban Sanitation and Hygiene Scorecard

WESTERN AFRICA CSO2 SUMMARY5

The CSO2 scorecard for West Africa shows a series of bottlenecks, most significantly in budget, equity and up-take building blocks for rural sanitation and hygiene, and equity and up-take in urban sanitation and hygiene.

Across the West African region a number of themes emerge from the CSO2 country specific priority actions - most commonly financing, approaches, technology and strategy.

Financing: All countries in the region have priority actions that relate to financing. Mobilisation of funds or increasing budget allocations is a priority in 10 out of 13 countries in the region. Half of the countries in the region have priorities which include establishing sustainable financing mechanisms for example through water supply charges in Benin, or microfinance in Ghana and Sierra Leone. Other countries also include investment planning or budget targeting as a priority.

Approaches: Many of the countries in the region have priorities pertaining to approach. Benin and Sierra Leone both prioritise the establishment of pro-poor approaches to sanitation and hygiene. Four countries (The Gambia, Liberia, Niger and Nigeria) specifically prioritise scaling up of CLTS or similar approaches.

Urban sanitation technology: Appropriate sanitation technologies for urban areas is a priority in 7 countries, mostly concerning installing or improving sewerage or emptying and treatment systems as in Benin, Burkina Faso, Mauritania and Niger. Liberia prioritises developing appropriate technologies for urban informal settlements.

Strategy: Priorities relating to strategies fall into three categories; either the need to develop a strategy as is the case in Sierra Leone, to implement or operationalize existing strategies as is the case in Benin, Mauritania and Niger, or to clarify certain aspects of the strategy as in Liberia.

5CSO2 West Africa Countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, The Gambia, Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Togo



19

COUNTRIES

© W

ater

Aid

EASTERN AFRICA 1 Burundi

2 Comoros

3 Djibouti

4 Eritrea

5 Ethiopia

6 Kenya

7 Rwanda

8 Somalia

9 South Sudan

10 Sudan

11 Tanzania

12 Uganda

20

EASTERN AFRICA

Ethiopia, 48.7Sudan, 17.1Tanzania, 5.7Kenya, 5.6Somalia, 4.8Eritrea, 4.2Uganda, 3.1Rwanda, 0.3Burundi, 0.1Djibouti, 0.1Comoros, 0

0

20

40

60

80

100

Cov

erag

e (%

)

2015 2008 1990

Eastern Africa Sanitation coverage trends, Eastern Africa,1990 – 2008

Improved facilities

Shared facilities

Open Defecation


1990 2008 1990 2008 1990 2008

22

33

22

43

23

27

13

17

32

37

15

16

37

14

9

41 48

23 19

40

12 10

24

23

Urban Rural Total

Sudan 17.1 million

Ethiopia 48.7 million

90 million people in Eastern Africa practised open defecation in 2008

(millions)

Sanitation coverage, Eastern African countries ,2008

Eastern Africa is not on track to meet the MDG sanitation target



Cov

erag

e (%

)

61

27 29

18

112

38

157

0

60

120

180

Urban Rural

(mill

ions

)

19902008

36

46

54

56

48

24

31

27

34

23

12

14

0

1

3

8

10

13

15

33

41

54

60

85

0 20 40 60 80 100

Comoros

Burundi

Rwanda

Djibouti

Uganda

Tanzania

Kenya

REGIONAL AVERAGE

Sudan

Somalia

Ethiopia

Eritrea

Coverage (%)


21

EASTERN AFRICA ETHEKWINI MONITORING

Overall the monitoring process in East Africa presents a positive picture of progress against the eThekwini Commitments on Sanitation. Notable achievements in ensuring the following commitments are met include:




















Bu

run

di

Co

mo

ros

Djib

ou

ti

Eri

trea

Eth

iop

ia

Ken

ya

Rw

and

a

So

mal

ia

So

uth

Su

dan

Su

dan

Tan

zan

ia

Ug

and

a

Tota

l /18

0 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 14

0 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 15

1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 14

0 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 11

0 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 14

0 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 13

0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 5

0 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 10

1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 16

22

PRIORITY ACTIONS FOR EASTERN AFRICA

FINANCING: All countries except Comoros noted sector financing as a priority, within this theme countries prioritised different aspects e.g. resource mobilisation to increase budget allocations for sanitation, or better targeting and tracking of investments. Ethiopia prioritised establishing a sanitation and hygiene budget line, whilst for Uganda the priority is to better allocate resources to an already existing budget line. The priority for Tanzania is to clarify the financial requirements to meet the MDG.

CAPACITY BUILDING: Capacity building was listed as a priority in different countries. In Djibouti partner capacity building is a priority. Sudan prioritised building decentralised capacity through additional and seconded staff.

STRATEGY: National sanitation and hygiene strategy featured as a priority. In most cases the focus was on implementation of already existing strategies and their dissemination to all levels of Government. For policy, Comoros needs to develop a sanitation and hygiene policy, whereas in Tanzania the existing policy needs to be finalised, approved and disseminated down to local government at district level.

SCALE-UP: Various approaches to sanitation were mentioned across the region including CLTS, sanitation marketing and hygiene clubs – common to all was the priority to scale-up implementation.



23

Rwanda

South Sudan

Coordination (institutionalise ICC)

Finance (basket fund, sustainable financing, targeting)

Demand for sanitation / sanitation marketing to scale up coverage

Financial (increase)

CLTS (government led)

Solid waste management

Hygiene and sanitation promotion (hygiene clubs, Community Based Environmental Health Promotion Programme)

CLTS (streamline, scale-up)

Action plan / investment plan (develop)

Strategy (implement)

Finance (increase budget allocations)

Capacity building (locality level, human resources)

Advocate locality commissioners (commitment and budgetary support)

Identify partners, CATS facilitation, geographic action plan

Policy (finalise, approve, disseminate)

Capacity building (all levels)

M+E (strengthen systems)

Financial (clarify requirements)

National Campaign / Global Sanitation Fund (implement)

Financial (resource allocation to budget line, MoU)

Scale-up (supply and demand)

Policy / Strategy (dissemination at all levels)

Sudan

Tanzania

Uganda

Intersectoral coordination

Leadership (designate lead institution)

Policy (develop)

Financial (resource mobilisation, national and donor)

Capacity building (partners)

Strategy / action plan (master plan, validate and implement)

Strategy / action plan (cascade implementation)

Leadership (strengthen institutional arrangements)

Financial (budget line, tracking, mobilisation, investment targeting)

Strategy / action plan (endorse, disseminate)

M+E (develop system)

Comoros

Djibouti

Ethiopia

Kenya


24



EASTERN AFRICA CSO2 SUMMARY

The CSO2 scorecard for East Africa6 shows a series of barriers, most significantly in the up-take building block for rural sanitation and hygiene, and budget, equity, up-take and use in urban sanitation and hygiene. Overall the urban service delivery pathway is more significantly hampered by bottlenecks than for rural.

Across the East African region a number of themes emerge from the CSO2 country specific priority actions – most commonly technology, financing, monitoring and evaluation and strategy.

Technology: Seven out of eight countries have some aspect of technology as a priority. For rural areas low cost improvements to existing traditional latrines is a priority in Burundi and Rwanda. In urban areas also improvement of existing systems is a priority in Burundi and Uganda, as well as investment in low cost sewerage options such as in Kenya and identification of sewerage alternatives in Tanzania. The engagement of the private sector in sanitation is a priority in Rwanda, Sudan and South Sudan.

Financing: Five out of eight countries in the region have priority actions that relate to financing. In some countries the priority relates to defining a financing strategy, for example in Ethiopia and South Sudan. In others the priority relates to cost recovery, for example in Sudan. Increased budget allocation to sanitation is a priority in Burundi. Sudan, South Sudan and Kenya all need to clarify their position on subsidy.

Monitoring and evaluation: Half of countries in the region have priority actions concerning monitoring and evaluation. For example the establishment of a baseline in Ethiopia, access and equity monitoring in Rwanda and the monitoring of uptake and outcomes in Kenya and Uganda.

Strategy and Action Plan: Another priority theme common to half the countries in the region is around sanitation strategies and action plans. Priorities fall into two categories; either the need to develop strategies or action plans as in South Sudan, Ethiopia and Rwanda or to complete and operationalize, as is the case with the Kenya sanitation strategy.

6CSO2 East Africa countries: Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda



25

© J

oe N

arke

vic

1 Angola

2 Botswana

3 Lesotho

4 Madagascar

5 Malawi

6 Mauritius

7 Mozambique

8 Namibia

9 South Africa

10 Swaziland

11 Zambia

12 Zimbabwe

SOUTHERN AFRICA

26

SOUTHERN AFRICA

Mozambique, 9.5Madagascar, 6.1Angola, 4.2South Africa, 3.9Zimbabwe, 3.1Zambia, 2.2Malawi, 1.4Namibia, 1.1Lesotho, 0.8Botswana, 0.3Swaziland, 0.2Mauritius, 0

0

20

40

60

80

100

Cov

erag

e (%

)

2015 2008 1990

Southern Africa Sanitation coverage trends, Southern Africa,1990 – 2008

Improved facilities

Shared facilities

Open Defecation


1990 2008 1990 2008 1990 2008

43

21

10

36

15

50

11

14

65

16

9

10

68

11

5

34

51

35 30

16

12 9

19

10

Urban Rural Total

Madagascar 6.1 million

Mozambique 9.5 million

33 million people in Southern Africa practised open defecation in 2008

(millions)

Sanitation coverage, Southern African countries ,2008

Southern Africa is not on track to meet the MDG sanitation target



Cov

erag

e (%

)

72

50 53

14

47

22

58

0

20

40

60

Urban Rural

(mill

ions

)

19902008

91

77

56

60

55

49

50

57

44

11

29

17

33

0

8

9

16

16

18

21

23

25

32

40

42

53

0 20 40 60 80 100

Mauritius

South Africa

Malawi

Botswana

Swaziland

Zambia

REGIONAL AVERAGE

Angola

Zimbabwe

Madagascar

Lesotho

Mozambique

Namibia

Coverage (%)


Angola 4.2 million

27

SOUTHERN AFRICA ETHEKWINI MONITORING

Overall the monitoring process in participating countries in Southern Africa presents a positive picture of progress against the eThekwini Commitments on Sanitation. Notable achievements in ensuring the following commitments are met include:





• To ensure that one, principal, accountable institution takes clear leadership of the national sanitation portfolio.















An

go

la

Bo

tsw

ana

Les

oth

o

Mad

agas

car

Mal

awi

Mo

zam

biq

ue

Nam

ibia

So

uth

Afr

ica

Sw

azila

nd

Zam

bia

Zim

bab

we

Tota

l /14

1 2 2 2 1 1 1 10

2 2 2 1 2 2 1 12

2 1 2 1 1 2 0 9

1 1 2 1 2 2 2 11

2 0 2 1 2 2 2 11

0 1 1 1 2 2 0 7

0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

0 1 1 1 1 1 1 6

0 2 2 2 2 2 2 12

28

PRIORITY ACTIONS FOR SOUTHERN AFRICA

ACTION PLANS: The two most commonly noted priorities concerned the national sanitation and hygiene action plans. For some such as Mozambique the priority is to develop an implementation plan along with the national strategy, for other such as Malawi it is a question of operationalizing an already existing action plan. Madagascar’s priority is to both develop and implement a sanitation action plan according to the national policy and strategy.

FINANCING: Five out of the six countries mentioned different aspects of financing. Mozambique and Zambia noted

mobilisation of financial resources as a priority, with an emphasis on decentralisation in Mozambique. Madagascar financing priorities include a financial needs assessment, budget system, policy on subsidy and micro-financing. Swaziland prioritised continuation of partner collaboration in ensuring that available resources are used effectively.

COORDINATION: Intersectoral, interministerial coordination is a priority in Madagascar and Mozambique, with Mozambique proposing a Memorandum of Understanding approved by cabinet.



29

Leadership / Intersectoral coordination

Action plan, budget, M + E system

Sanitation and hygiene promotion (schools)

Financial (needs assessment, budget system, subsidy policy)

Action plan (develop and implement)

Intersectoral coordination

Capacity building (district assemblies)

Action plan (review and operationalization)

Establishment and staffing of sanitation and hygiene department

Financial (mobilise funds, peri-urban areas, decentralise funds)

M+E (indicators, monitoring mechanisms, community leader involvement)

Strategy / Action plan (develop, include human resources)

Leadership / Intersectoral coordination (MoU)

Financial (coordination to maximise available resources)

CLTS (reinforce, remove dependency on subsidy)

Peri-urban / Informal (integrated approach, inclusion of environmental sanitation)

Financial (mobilisation, allocation)

Strategy / Action plan (integrated, accelerate harmonised workplan)

Urban and rural systems rehabilitation, promote ODF

Financial (mobilise essential resources, finalise budget)

Policy / Strategy / Action plan (finalise)

Angola

Madagascar

Malawi

Mozambique


Swaziland

Zambia

Zimbabwe

30



SOUTHERN AFRICA CSO2 SUMMARY

The CSO2 scorecard for Southern Africa7 shows a fairly unimpeded service delivery pathway for both rural and urban sanitation and hygiene. However there are a number of building blocks that are a drag on service delivery and still require attention.

Across the Southern African region a number of themes emerge from the CSO2 priority actions - most commonly strategy, approach, policy and private sector involvement.

Strategy / action plan: Priorities relating to strategies or strategic action planning, which occur in five of seven countries fall into two categories; either the need to develop and implement a strategy or action plan as is the case in Angola, Malawi, urban South Africa and Zambia; or operationalize an existing strategy as is the case in Madagascar.

Approaches: Four countries in the region have priority actions that fall into the broad category of approaches. In some cases, the priority is to build a national strategy around an approach such as sanitation marketing in Malawi, or to take an approach to scale, such as TSSM in Mozambique. In other cases the priority is to pilot new approaches such as demand-led approaches in South Africa.

Policy: Three countries in the region have priorities that relate to policy. In Angola the priority is to resume work on developing and implementing the national sanitation policy, and Zambia needs to ensure that sanitation is well articulated in the Water Policy that is under development. Madagascar needs to accelerate implementation of the existing policy.

Private sector involvement: Madagascar, Mozambique and Zimbabwe all prioritise greater involvement of the local private sector in sanitation through collaboration and capacity building.

7CSO2 Southern Africa countries: Angola, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, South Africa, Zambia, Zimbabwe



31

© x

xxxx

xxxx

xxxx

xxxx

xxxx

x

1 Cameroon

2 Central African Republic

3 Chad

4 Congo, Dem. Rep. of

5 Congo, Rep. of

6 Equatorial Guinea

7 Gabon

8 São Tomé and Principe

CENTRAL AFRICA

32

CENTRAL AFRICA

Chad, 7.1Democratic Republic of the Congo, 6.4Cameroon, 0.9Central African Republic, 0.9Congo, 0.3Sao Tome and Principe, 0.1Gabon, 0.0

Central Africa Sanitation coverage trends, Central Africa,1990 – 2008

Improved facilities

Shared facilities

Open Defecation


1990 2008 1990 2008 1990 2008

17

15

47

24

37

27

12

21

27

35

32

6

27

37

3

23 32

23 9

33

18

4

36

55

Urban Rural Total

DR Congo 6.4 million

Chad 7.1 million

16 million people in Central Africa practised open defecation in 2008

(millions)

Sanitation coverage, Central African countries ,2008

0

20

40

60

80

100

Cov

erag

e (%

)

2015 2008 1990

Central Africa is not on track to meet the MDG sanitation target


13

38

27

49

0

20

40

60

Urban Rural

(mill

ions

)

19902008


Cov

erag

e (%

)

59

27 31 33

47

30

23

27

34

26

9

1

5

8

10

15

20

55

65

0 20 40 60 80 100

Gabon

Cameroon

Congo

DR Congo

REGIONAL AVERAGE


Sao Tome and Principe

Chad

Coverage (%)


33

CENTRAL AFRICA ETHEKWINI MONITORING

Overall the monitoring process in Central Africa shows that although there have been some clear areas of success; there is still work to be done.

Notable achievements in ensuring the following commitment was met include:


There has also been some progress in the following commitments:







Cam

ero

on

Cen

tral

A

fric

an

Rep

ub

lic

Ch

ad

Co

ng

o,

Dem

. R

ep.

of

Co

ng

o,

Rep

. o

f

Eq

uat

ori

al

Gu

inea

Gab

on

São

To

mé

an

d P

rin

cip

e

TO

TAL

/10










1 1 1 2 1 6

0 1 1 2 1 5

1 1 2 2 1 7

1 0 2 2 1 6

2 1 1 0 2 6

0 1 2 2 2 7

0 0 0 1 2 3

1 1 1 1 0 4

2 2 1 2 2 9

34

PRIORITY ACTIONS FOR CENTRAL AFRICA

POLICY: Central African Republic and Democratic Republic of Congo both prioritised the development of a national sanitation policy. Democratic Republic of Congo specifies that the policy should be within the framework of decentralisation and recommends use of low-cost appropriate technologies, on-site sanitation in rural areas and collective systems in urban areas.

ACTION PLAN: Equatorial Guinea and Central African Republic both prioritised the preparation of national sanitation action plans.

Other priorities for Democratic Republic of Congo include advocating for both increased budget allocation and improved funds disbursement especially to rural

and peri-urban areas. Democratic Republic of Congo also prioritised institutional capacity building in the areas of planning, implementation and monitoring and evaluation, ensuring adequate numbers of skilled staff, training opportunities, equipment and infrastructure.

Equatorial Guinea also prioritised creation of a lead institution for sanitation as well as a multi-sector task force to drive the sector.

Central African Republic prioritised taking the CLTS approach to scale and carrying out IEC campaigns.

Note:

• Due to only 4 countries participating in Central Africa, the results are somewhat limited and may not be representative of the whole region.

• The word cloud does not include data from Republic of Congo.



35

Hygiene and sanitation promotion (IEC campaigns)

CLTS (scale-up)

Action plan (develop)

Finance (increase budget allocation, effective disbursement)

Capacity building (institutions, planning, implementation, M+E, staff numbers, training equipment, infrastructure)

Policy (develop, decentralisation, rural on-site tech, urban collective tech, low cost)

Action plan (develop)

Intersectoral coordination (create taskforce)

Leadership (lead institution)

Coordination framework (establish)

Low cost tech, hygiene and sanitation education (promote)

Capacity building (local)

Financing mechanisms

Peri-urban / rural sanitation (rehabilitation, construction, equity)


Democratic Republic of Congo

Equatorial Guinea

Republic of Congo


36



In both rural and urban sanitation and hygiene the CSO2 scorecard for Central Africa shows a series of significant barriers, in almost all building blocks.

Across the Central African8 region a number of themes emerge from the CSO2 country specific priority actions - most commonly financing, approaches, technology and strategy.

Financing: All five countries in the region have priority actions that relate to different aspects of financing. Mobilisation of additional funds for sanitation is a priority in Chad. In Central African Republic donor advocacy for longer funding cycles is a priority as current short term financing is not conducive to behaviour change programmes. Financial monitoring and tracking requires improvement in Democratic Republic of Congo. Both Cameroon and Chad have prioritised the need clarify subsidy strategy.

Approaches: All five countries in the region have priorities pertaining to approach. Democratic Republic of Congo has prioritised scaling up an already successful approach; Cameroon, Central African Republic and Chad prioritise defining and implementing an agreed approach.

Sanitation technology: Sanitation technology is a priority in three countries for example in Republic of Congo where the development and promotion of low cost appropriate technologies is prioritised.

Strategy: Both Cameroon and Chad’s priorities include putting in place a sanitation strategy that clearly defines hygiene promotion approaches, subsidy issues and technology choices.

CENTRAL AFRICA CSO2 SUMMARY

8CSO2 Central Africa countries: Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Democratic Republic of Congo, Republic of Congo



37

The following reference table collates feedback from country preparation meetings on existing areas of strength that countries can offer as peer support to build capacity in other countries to get them on track to meet the sanitation MDG.

Improvements in family hygiene and sanitation practice seen as a result of pilot projects that are now being scaled up nationally.

High coverage communication for behaviour change programme through multiple actors and mass media.

Dedicated Health Extension Programmes

Hygiene promotion at grass roots level, with the use of students, CBOs and health assistants

National sanitation policy with 5 distinct strategies including a capacity building strategy

Sector action plan and MDG framework takes into account capacity building needs; necessary personnel in place for capacity building in the private and public sector; short and long term programme for capacity building.

Capacity development through both technology development and formal education options (diploma)

Good coordination in CLTS implementation (Govt, Aid agencies, UN agencies, NGOs, donors)

CLTSH guidelines on implementation, training and veification

CLTS and sanitation marketing

CLTS

CLTS

CLTS trials

Involvement of municipalities and district councils and traditional leaders in follow-up and scale-up

CLTS implementation at national level

CLTS adapted to the local context and at scale

Large-scale implementation of CLTS and the multisectoral system of evaluation and recognition of open defecation free communities. Manuals and other materials prepared in Portuguese may be useful for the Lusophone countries.

Scaling up CLTS

Coordination and M+E mechanisms

Coordination of sanitation sub-sector actors

National and provincial level coordination mechanism for approach harmonisation, information sharing and to ensure efficient utilisation of resources

National Hygiene and Sanitation Taskforce led by the MoH, a tri-ministerial MOU and a WASH Implementation Framework

Institutional arrangements, and sector coordination

Benin

Congo, Dem Rep of

Ethiopia

Mozambique

Mali

Togo

Zimbabwe

Angola

Ethiopia

Malawi

Mauritania

Sierra Leone

Swaziland

Côte d’Ivoire

Guinea-Bissau

Mali

Mozambique

Nigeria

Burkina Faso


Congo, Dem Rep of

Ethiopia

Ghana

Behaviour change approaches

Capacity building

CLTS

CLTS pilot

CLTS at scale

Coordination

EXISTING CAPACITY AND STRENGTHS

38

Decentralisation

Emergency response and recovery

Financing

Handwashing with soap

Hygiene and Sanitation Promotion

Integration

Institutional leadership arrangements

Guinea-Bissau

Guinea

Kenya

Nigeria

Senegal

Swaziland

Tanzania

Uganda

Zimbabwe

Zambia

Benin

Niger

Uganda

Zambia

South Sudan

Sudan

Benin

Djibouti

Djibouti

Gambia, The

Guinea-Bissau

Madagascar

Mali

Sierra Leone

Kenya

Angola

Ethiopia

Madagascar

Zimbabwe

Congo, Dem Rep of

Niger


Liberia

Mauritania

Rwanda

Multi-partner water and sanitation group meet monthly to harmonise activities

Sector coordination

Government-led multi-stakeholder consultation and participation

Coordination mechanism

Sector coordination

National WASH forum working towards coordination and harmonisation

Coordination of government agencies and development partners with sanitation responsibilities through an MOU and dialogue structure.

Coordination at the national and district levels

Effective coordination mechanisms at all levels

Implementation of urban and rural sanitation initiatives through a national programmatic approach

Decentralisationprocess and growingrole to communes in hygiene and sanitation promotion.

Decentralisation and the devolution of services and capacity to communes as well as local planning processes

Decentralisation of sanitation implementation

Decentralisation policy to ensure equitable and effective delivery of sanitation services.

Experience in coordination, emergency response and linking recovery, resettlement and development in countries emerging from conflict.

Experience in emergency response in Darfur

Central level planning and budgeting for the sector due to the programme approach.

Credit / saving scheme based on the results of a willingness to pay study.

Urban sanitation financing through cross subsidy (water tax)

National budget tracking for sanitation budget allocation

Strategic information system for resource mobilisation

Implementing Global Sanitation Fund actions

Sector wide approach to WASH which realises the medium term expenditure framework

Format for allocation of local government grants

Communication strategy and strong partnership with the media as part of strategy to promote handwashing with soap

Preparation of communications material and posters with involvement of national artists

Dedicated Health Extension Programme

National sanitation education campaign carried out by the WASH coalition

Software approaches such as PPHE, CBM and CHCs

Integration of sanitation and water programmes.

National water supply and sanitation programme

Putting in place a rural sanitation lead agency (ANEA)

Process of developing a sanitation compact

Creation of the MHA and technical structures

Strong political will for sanitation with effective enforcement mechanisms.



39

M+E

Policy, strategy and action plan

Private sector involvement

Results based planning

Sanitation in institutions

Sanitation marketing

Sector learning

Technologies

Urban Sanitation

Burkina Faso

Ethiopia

Madagascar

Malawi

Mozambique

Burkina Faso

Djibouti

Ethiopia

Gambia, The

Ghana

Guinea

Kenya

Mali

Malawi

Mauritania

Sudan

Senegal

Sierra Leone

South Sudan

Togo

Uganda

Kenya

Rwanda

Zambia

Rwanda

Côte d’Ivoire

Gambia, The

Guinea

Malawi

Ghana

Tanzania

Senegal

Côte d’Ivoire

Swaziland

Zambia

Mechanisms for coordination and for M+E (CNHP, CNP, CaPa, annual review)

Inclusion of M+E in National Sanitation and Hygiene Strategic Plan

Development of process of national and JMP data reconciliation

Sanitation mapping

Systems for monitoring sanitation over time at grassroots level, in partnership with community leaders and officials from various sectors

Sanitation and hygiene policies and strategies

Strategic sanitation planning

Sanitation and Hygiene Strategic Action Plan

Sanitation strategy development

Policy and other documents.

Development of sanitation and hygiene policy and strategy

Development of policies and strategies

National sanitation policy with 5 distinct strategies including a capacity building strategy

Policy development

National sanitation strategy

National Sanitation policy and strategic plan

Development of national policy and MDG action plan on sanitation

Well-articulated policy on water and sanitation and an implementation strategy

Lessons learned in development of the WASH policy and strategic framework

Action plan for the water and sanitation sector and MDG framework

Policy and strategy formulation

Through PPPs with the MoPHS private sector provides opportunities for financing and capacity building

Community-based organisation and private sector involvement in sanitation.

Commercialised urban sanitation and regulation

Performance and results based planning and implementation.

Introduction of hygiene, sanitation and water education into the national curriculum

School Sanitation Standards and design to ensure gender aspects are applied

Development and use of school WASH teaching package

CLTS and sanitation marketing

Platforms for sector dialogue and learning

Testing of innovative approaches.

Experience in development of alternative technologies

Leasing arrangements for collective sanitation and drainage in Abidjan.

Set up of two urban waste water treatment plants

Implementation of urban and rural sanitation initiatives through a national programmatic approach

40 © U

NIC

EF



41

ANNEX 1 – JMP DATA TABLES FOR AFRICA

Sanitation Coverage dataSanitation coverage data

Rest ofsub-Saharan Africa

Nigeria

Ethiopia

Sudan

* 1995-2008 estimates are given for Cape Verde, Gabon, The Gambia, Guinea Bissau, Sao Tome and Principe, Sierra Leone, Somalia, and SwazilandData not available to the WHO/UNICEF JMP are marked with a “ – “

Country

Population2008 Sanitation Coverage (%)

Population gaining access

1990 - 2008 (x 1,000)

Urban Rural Total

Total(x 1,000)

Urban (%) Im

prov

ed

Shar

ed

Uni

mpr

oved

Ope

n de

feca

tion

Impr

oved

Shar

ed

Uni

mpr

oved

Ope

n de

feca

tion

Impr

oved

Shar

ed

Uni

mpr

oved

Ope

n de

feca

tion

Angola 18,021 57 86 - 13 1 18 - 29 53 57 - 20 23 7,606Algeria 34,373 65 98 - 1 1 88 - 2 10 95 - 1 4 10,127Benin 8,662 41 24 34 11 31 4 10 6 80 12 20 8 60 800Botswana 1,921 60 74 7 18 1 39 11 12 38 60 9 15 16 666Burkina Faso 15,234 20 33 20 39 8 6 7 10 77 11 10 15 64 1,147Burundi 8,074 10 49 22 27 2 46 4 49 1 46 6 47 1 1,214Cameroon 19,088 57 56 17 26 1 35 8 47 10 47 13 35 5 3,222Cape Verde 499 60 65 - 2 33 38 - 6 56 54 - 4 42 110*Central African Republic 4,339 39 43 24 30 3 28 14 27 31 34 18 28 20 1,153Chad 10,914 27 23 19 42 16 4 5 8 83 9 9 17 65 616Comoros 661 28 50 3 46 1 30 2 68 0 36 2 62 0 163Congo 3,615 61 31 31 36 2 29 16 37 18 30 25 37 8 -Côte d'Ivoire 20,591 49 36 24 35 5 11 12 29 48 23 18 32 27 2,214Democratic Republic of the Congo 64,257 34 23 33 42 2 23 22 41 14 23 26 41 10 11,448Djibouti 849 87 63 5 32 0 10 1 28 61 56 4 32 8 106Egypt 81,527 43 97 3 0 0 92 6 2 0 94 5 1 0 35,264Equatorial Guinea 659 39 - - - - - - - - - - - - -Eritrea 4,927 21 52 - 7 41 4 - 0 96 14 - 1 85 406Ethiopia 80,713 17 29 34 29 8 8 2 19 71 12 7 21 60 7,754Gabon 1,448 85 33 36 30 1 30 25 43 2 33 34 32 1 83*Gambia 1,660 57 68 27 4 1 65 14 14 7 67 21 8 4 454*Ghana 23,351 50 18 70 5 7 7 38 21 34 13 54 13 20 1,988Guinea 9,833 34 34 42 23 1 11 6 50 33 19 18 41 22 1,315Guinea-Bissau 1,575 30 49 8 41 2 9 0 48 43 21 2 46 31 138*Kenya 38,765 22 27 51 20 2 32 18 32 18 31 25 29 15 5,925Lesotho 2,049 25 40 35 17 8 25 3 21 51 29 11 20 40 82Liberia 3,793 60 25 25 20 30 4 12 7 77 17 20 14 49 407Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 6,294 78 97 - 3 0 96 - 4 - 97 - 3 0 1,868Madagascar 19,111 29 15 28 39 18 10 17 35 38 11 20 37 32 1,200Malawi 14,846 19 51 42 5 2 57 24 8 11 56 27 8 9 4,344Mali 12,706 32 45 25 26 4 32 14 33 21 36 18 30 16 2,324Mauritania 3,215 41 50 18 16 16 9 4 8 79 26 10 11 53 518Mauritius 1,280 42 93 7 0 0 90 7 3 0 91 7 2 0 203Morocco 31,606 56 83 14 3 0 52 6 4 38 69 10 4 17 8,741Mozambique 22,383 37 38 7 41 14 4 1 36 59 17 3 38 42 2,315Namibia 2,130 37 60 17 5 18 17 4 6 73 33 9 5 53 349Niger 14,704 16 34 25 21 20 4 2 3 91 9 6 6 79 928Nigeria 151,212 48 36 38 14 12 28 14 27 31 32 26 20 22 12,373Rwanda 9,721 18 50 18 31 1 55 6 36 3 54 8 35 3 3,605Sao Tome and Principe 160 61 30 4 17 49 19 5 12 64 26 4 15 55 15*Senegal 12,211 42 69 19 10 2 38 10 21 31 51 14 16 19 3,363Seychelles 84 56 97 - 2 1 - - - - - - - - -Sierra Leone 5,560 38 24 47 25 4 6 18 40 36 13 29 34 24 319*Somalia 8,926 37 52 30 15 3 6 6 5 83 23 15 8 54 636*South Africa 49,668 61 84 10 4 2 65 9 9 17 77 10 5 8 12,890Sudan 41,348 43 55 - 25 20 18 - 24 58 34 - 25 41 4,847Swaziland 1,168 25 61 32 5 2 53 20 6 21 55 23 6 16 172*Togo 6,459 42 24 44 9 23 3 6 13 78 12 22 11 55 265Tunisia 10,169 67 96 2 2 0 64 8 14 14 85 4 6 5 2,63`Uganda 31,657 13 38 56 4 2 49 22 18 11 48 26 16 10 8,280United Republic of Tanzania 42,484 25 32 30 36 2 21 21 41 17 24 23 40 13 4,087Zambia 12,620 35 59 22 17 2 43 9 22 26 49 14 19 18 2,545Zimbabwe 12,463 37 56 40 2 2 37 15 9 39 44 24 7 25 985

Sub-Saharan Africa 822,436 37 44 31 17 8 24 13 25 38 31 20 22 27 114,344Africa 987,902 39 55 27 12 6 32 12 21 35 41 18 18 23 171,716

20For more data and information on the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation visit: www.wssinfo.org

42

AN

NE

X 2

– E

THE

KW

INI I

ND

ICAT

OR

S, D

EFI

NIT

ION

S A

ND

S

CO

RIN

G C

RIT

ER

IA

Sco

re

eThek

winiIndicatorsDefi

nitionsan

dSco

ringCriteria

TrafficLight

Ind

icat

or

Defi

nition

No

Dat

a

Cri

teri

a fo

r R

ed

No

Pro

gre

ss =

0In

pro

gre

ss =

1G

oo

d p

rog

ress

= 2

1) I

s th

ere

a n

atio

nal

sa

nit

atio

n*

po

licy?

A

nat

iona

l San

itatio

n P

olic

y is

a

form

al d

ocum

ent

pre

par

ed

by

gove

rnm

ent

and

end

orse

d b

y la

wm

aker

s (p

arlia

men

t) to

gui

de

and

pro

vid

e vi

sion

, st

rate

gic

dire

ctio

n, in

stitu

tiona

l ar

rang

emen

ts,

coor

din

atio

n,

imp

lem

enta

tion

fram

ewor

k,

finan

cing

mec

hani

sm a

nd

tech

nica

l gui

dan

ce o

n sa

nita

tion.

If th

ere

is n

o sa

nita

tion

pol

icy.

If th

e co

untr

y ha

s a

sani

tatio

n P

olic

y

that

is p

rep

ared

b

y go

vern

men

t b

ut n

ot y

et

end

orse

d b

y p

arlia

men

t.

If th

e co

untr

y ha

s a

sani

tatio

n P

olic

y th

at is

pre

par

ed b

y go

vern

men

t an

d e

ndor

sed

by

par

liam

ent.

Cri

teri

a fo

r ye

llow

Cri

teri

a fo

r G

reen

If th

e co

untr

y ha

s no

nat

iona

l sa

nita

tion

pla

n 2)

Is

ther

e o

ne

nat

ion

al

san

itat

ion

pla

n to

mee

t th

e M

DG

ta

rget

an

d d

oes

it

ad

dre

ss t

he

8 re

com

men

ded

d

imen

sio

ns

fro

m

the

Afr

icaS

an

Co

nfe

ren

ce?

This

ref

ers

to

an S

anita

tion

ro

adm

ap,

San

itatio

n s

trat

egy

and

a S

anita

tion

Act

ion

pla

n (In

clud

ing

clea

r ro

les

& r

esp

onsi

bili

ties,

, fin

anci

ng,

Tim

e fr

ames

, M

&E

sy

stem

s et

c.) t

hat

add

ress

es

the

8 re

com

men

ded

dim

ensi

on

(i.e.

inst

itutio

nal a

rran

gem

ents

, co

-ord

inat

ion,

pol

icy/

stra

tegy

, d

eman

d le

d-s

upp

ly fe

d sa

nita

tion,

cap

acity

bui

ldin

g,

Dec

entr

alis

atio

n a

nd M

&E

)

If th

e co

untr

y ha

s a

natio

nal

sani

tatio

n p

lan

pre

par

ed w

ith

at le

ast

4 of

the

rec

omm

end

ed

dim

ensi

ons

ad

dre

ssed

OR

with

no

imp

lem

enta

tion

If th

e co

untr

y ha

s na

tiona

l sa

nita

tion

pla

n p

rep

ared

and

un

der

imp

lem

enta

tion-

with

the

8

reco

mm

end

ed d

imen

sion

s ar

e ad

dre

ssed

.



43

3)W

hatprofileis

g

iven

to

san

itat

ion

wit

hin

th

e P

RS

P**

?

This

imp

lies

that

the

offi

cial

P

over

ty R

educ

tion

Str

ateg

y

(PR

SP

) inc

lud

es a

sec

tion

on

San

itatio

n

No

men

tion

of s

anita

tion

in t

he

PR

SP

If th

e P

RS

P in

clud

es a

sec

tion

on s

anita

tion

and

no

targ

ets

with

lim

ited

det

ails

and

no

allo

catio

n fo

r im

ple

men

tatio

n.

If th

e P

RS

P in

clud

es s

anita

tion

and

sp

ecifi

c ta

rget

s w

ith

det

aile

d b

reak

dow

n of

ur

ban

/rur

al,

hous

ehol

d a

nd

inst

itutio

nal,

excr

eta

& w

aste

-w

ater

with

ded

icat

ed b

udge

ts

and

res

pon

sib

le in

stitu

tions

for

imp

lem

enta

tion,

coo

rdin

atio

n,

mon

itorin

g an

d r

epor

ting.

4) I

s th

ere

a p

rin

cip

al

acco

un

tab

le

inst

itu

tio

n t

o t

ake

lead

ersh

ip?

Pri

ncip

al A

cco

unta

ble

Inst

itutio

n

a d

esig

nate

d in

stitu

tion

with

cle

ar

natio

nal m

and

ate

for

sani

tatio

n p

rogr

ams

, d

evel

opm

ent,

Im

ple

men

tatio

n, a

nd M

&E

No

sing

le in

stitu

tion

with

m

and

ate

for

sani

tatio

n

One

des

igna

ted

Inst

itutio

n w

ith

man

dat

e to

pro

vid

e le

ader

ship

fo

r sa

nita

tion

pro

gram

s,

dev

elop

men

t, im

ple

men

tatio

n,

M&

E b

ut h

as n

o ca

pac

ity a

nd/o

r re

sour

ces

to fu

lfill

the

man

dat

e.

One

des

igna

ted

Inst

itutio

n w

ith

man

dat

e to

pro

vid

e le

ader

ship

fo

r sa

nita

tion

pro

gram

s,

dev

elop

men

t, im

ple

men

tatio

n,

M&

E a

nd h

as c

apac

ity a

nd

reso

urce

s to

fulfi

ll th

e m

and

ate.

5) I

s th

ere

on

e co

ord

inat

ing

b

od

y in

volv

ing

all

stak

eho

lder

s?

One

co

ord

inat

ing

bo

dy

invo

lvin

g al

l sta

keho

lder

s re

fers

to

a na

tiona

l cro

ss s

ecto

ral g

roup

w

ith a

man

dat

e to

ens

ure

cons

olid

atio

n &

coh

eren

ce o

f al

l san

itatio

n p

rogr

ams

to a

void

d

uplic

atio

n an

d in

crea

se c

ost

effe

ctiv

enes

s.

No

sing

le e

ffect

ive

coor

din

atin

g b

ody

with

man

dat

e to

co

ord

inat

e sa

nita

tion

One

coo

rdin

atin

g b

ody

with

fu

ll m

and

ate

but

with

out

reso

urce

s an

d/o

r ca

pac

ity,

and

not

rec

ogni

zed

by

othe

r or

gani

satio

ns.

One

b

ody/

gro

up w

ith fu

ll m

and

ate

with

effe

ctiv

e ca

pac

ity

and

res

ourc

es a

nd r

ecog

nize

d b

y ot

her

orga

nisa

tions

as

the

coor

din

atin

g b

ody.

6)Isthereasp

ecific

pu

blic

sec

tor

bu

dg

et li

ne

for

san

itat

ion

?

Pub

lic s

ecto

r b

udge

t lin

e at

na

tiona

l or

loca

l lev

el,

earm

arke

d fo

r sa

nita

tion

inte

rven

tion

/ p

rogr

ams.

No

pub

lic b

udge

tary

allo

catio

n fo

r sa

nita

tion

Bud

get

allo

catio

ns b

ut n

ot u

sed

for

the

sect

orP

ublic

sec

tor

bud

get

allo

catio

ns a

nd u

sed

for

the

sect

or

44

8) I

s th

ere

a sa

nit

atio

n m

on

ito

rin

g a

nd

ev

alu

atio

n (

M+

E)

syst

em?

M&

E s

yste

ms

for

sani

tatio

n ar

e in

pla

ce w

ith le

ader

ship

and

en

dor

sed

by

gove

rnm

ent.

No

form

al e

stab

lishe

d M

&E

sy

stem

s M

&E

sys

tem

s ar

e in

pla

ce b

ut

not

oper

atio

nal (

no c

apac

ity a

nd

no r

esou

rces

)

M&

E s

yste

ms

are

in p

lace

and

ef

fect

ive

with

man

agem

ent

pro

cess

es,

info

rmat

ion

syst

ems,

st

and

ard

s, s

trat

egie

s, p

lans

, in

dic

ator

s, r

epor

ting

lines

&

acco

unta

bili

ty r

elat

ions

hip

s es

tab

lishe

d;

and

use

d b

y al

l st

akeh

old

ers,

with

cap

acity

&

reso

urce

s.

9) D

o I

nst

itu

tio

nal

sa

nit

atio

n p

rog

ram

s in

clu

de

gen

der

as

pec

ts?

Inst

itutio

nal s

anita

tion

pro

gram

s re

fer

to c

omm

unity

san

itatio

n (e

spec

ially

for

scho

ols)

; ge

nder

as

pec

t re

fer

mai

nly

to t

he

sep

arat

ion

of t

oile

t fa

cilit

ies

for

mal

e an

d fe

mal

e or

boy

s an

d g

irls

If In

stitu

tiona

l san

itatio

n p

rogr

ams

doe

s no

t in

clud

e ge

nder

asp

ects

If In

stitu

tiona

l san

itatio

n p

rogr

ams

incl

ude

gend

er

asp

ects

but

not

ap

plie

d

If In

stitu

tiona

l san

itatio

n p

rogr

ams

incl

ude

gend

er

asp

ects

and

are

ap

plie

d

Leg

end

No

Dat

aN

o P

rog

ress

= 0

In p

rog

ress

= 1

Go

od

pro

gre

ss =

2S

core

*San

itatio

n -

Defi

ned

by

the

Cou

ntry

Sta

tus

Rev

iew

(CS

R) r

epor

t to

the

Afr

icaS

an c

onfe

renc

e “A

rev

iew

of t

he S

anita

tion

and

Hyg

iene

sta

tus

in 3

2 co

untr

ies:

Can

Afr

ica

affo

rd t

o m

iss

the

sani

tatio

n M

DG

tar

get”

- a

s th

e sa

fe d

isp

osal

of e

xcre

ta a

nd d

omes

tic w

aste

wat

er m

anag

emen

t; fo

r so

me

case

s in

the

rep

ort,

hyg

iene

can

be

incl

uded

in t

he t

erm

‘sa

nita

tion’

.

** If

a c

ount

ry h

as n

o P

RS

P;

doe

s it

feat

ure

in t

he N

atio

nal D

evel

opm

ent

Pla

n

7) I

s 0.

5% o

f G

DP

al

loca

ted

to

sa

nit

atio

n?

0.5%

of

GD

P a

lloca

tion

to

sani

tatio

n is

the

tar

get

ple

dge

d b

y th

e co

untr

ies

in t

he e

Thek

win

i co

mm

itmen

ts.

The

Pub

lic s

ecto

r b

udge

tary

al

loca

tion

to s

anita

tion

is le

ss

than

0.1

% o

f the

GD

P.

The

pub

lic s

ecto

r b

udge

tary

al

loca

tion

to s

anita

tion

activ

ities

is

bet

wee

n 0.

1 %

- 0

.5%

of t

he

GD

P.

The

pub

lic s

ecto

r b

udge

tary

al

loca

tion

to s

anita

tion

activ

ities

is

at

leas

t 0.

5% o

r m

ore

of t

he

GD

P.

45

46

Date post:	18-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Sanitation and Hygiene in Africa at a Glance€¦ · 2015, launched in June 2011. SANITATION STATUS...

Documents