Considering the Water Poverty Index in the context of poverty alleviation

The Water Poverty Index (WPI), introduced by Sullivan, is an inter-disciplinary tool that integrates the key issues relating to water resources, combining physical, social, economic and environmental information associated with people’s ability to get access to water and to use water for productive purposes. It is most relevant at the community or sub-basin scales. This paper is concerned not with the development or underlying methodology of the index, but with how it can best be applied in practice to generate useful data, and then how these data may be used to generate benefits, especially for poor people who suffer from inadequate access to water. WPI values would need to be generated over wide areas, and this would require substantial institutional development. To do this, the use of existing census procedures and the needs for simplified data collection are considered, and the idea of widespread data collection through schools is examined. A number of technical issues relating to implementation of the WPI are discussed, particularly how the different spatial scales inter-relate and how the assessment of the physical resource and the collection of social and economic data may be made compatible. Finally, we discuss how the WPI value can be used in practice, and some of the issues and problems that this presents

The water poverty index: development and application at the community scale

The article details the development and uses of the water poverty index (WPI). The index was developed as a holistic tool to measure water stress at the household and community levels, designed to aid national decision makers, at community and central government level, as well as donor agencies, to determine priority needs for interventions in the water sector. The index combines into a single number a cluster of data directly and indirectly relevant to water stress. Subcomponents of the index include measures of: access to water; water quantity, quality and variability; water uses (domestic, food, productive purposes); capacity for water management; and environmental aspects. The WPI methodology was developed through pilot projects in South Africa, Tanzania and Sri Lanka and involved intensive participation and consultation with all stakeholders, including water users, politicians, water sector professionals, aid agency personnel and others. The article discusses approaches for the further implementation of the water poverty index, including the possibilities of acquiring the necessary data through existing national surveys or by establishing interdisciplinary water modules in school curricula. The article argues that the WPI fills the need for a simple, open and transparent tool, one that will appeal to politicians and decision makers, and at the same time can empower poor people to participate in the better targeting of water sector interventions and development budgets in general

Integration of the biophysical and social sciences using an indicator approach: Addressing water problems at different scales

To be operationally sustainable, any system of environmental management needs to be based on a truly holistic assessment of all of the relevant factors influencing it. This is of course a daunting task, demanding as it does detailed and reliable data, not only from both the physical and social sciences, but also incorporating some representation of that part of knowledge which could be described as non-scientific. This could be said to include the uncertainties of market forces and political will, as well as traditional knowledge systems, and artistic representation. Recognising the limitations of our own knowledge system is important if we are to make progress in the achievement of sustainability. The development of less deterministic models is a step forward in that direction. This paper provides some discussion on the challenges associated with the integration of data from different disciplines, and the application of that data at different scales. Alternative approaches to the assessment of water resources for policy making are highlighted, and the validity of using such assessments at different scales is discussed. Using the Water Poverty Index as illustration, examples are provided of how an integrated assessment framework can be used to provide consistency and transparency in decision-making, and how this can, in practice, be applied at a variety of scales