December 5, 2018

Are One-Size-Fits-All Metrics for Global WASH Really Appropriate?

Please sign-up or login

Not a member? Sign Up

Comments from the Community

2 Comments

  1. Anna - E4C Fellow says:

    Awesome article Riley! I’ve always wondered how they came up with the definition of safe/unsafely managed water or sanitation. It also completely ignores that not all water needs to be safe- if its just used for irrigation or washing then it is alright.

  2. edward.bourque@gmail.com says:

    Hello.

    It’s always important to question metrics, and global standardization will always have its drawbacks.

    Having said this, I think it is critical to acknowledge the big leap in comparative understanding that should come out of moving from the MDG’s “improved” metrics that you discuss to the ‘safely managed’ drinking water estimates of the SDGs. SDG metrics take accessibility, availability/reliability, and water quality into account.

    What I think is more important is taking a serious look at the high failure rates of water projects and doing a whole lot more about improving their effectiveness. [Improve International (http://www.improveinternational.org/) has some sobering stats on this.]

    Focusing on improving country enabling environments (sector governance and market effectiveness), water point and utility operational /management concerns (cost recovery), and household economic wherewithal, the sector can move the needle a lot faster, progress-wise.(http://thecityfix.com/blog/urban-water-governance-in-the-developing-world-accountability-and-affordability-are-keys-to-access-water-ed-bourque/ )

    Otherwise, donors will continue to pour money down a sieve when you see project after project/water point after water point failing 5-10 years after the money runs out/the project ends.

    Ed Bourque
    Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH) Consultant
    http://www.edbourqueconsulting.com/blog/

Leave a Reply

Join a global community of changemakers.

Become A Member