Environmentally sustainable WASH? Current discourse, planetary boundaries and future directions

© IWA Publishing 2017. The significant challenge of achieving safe, reliable and continuous service delivery has been a focus of the water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) sector in recent years, with less attention given to other important sustainability considerations such as environmental sustainability. The agenda set by the Sustainable Development Goals prompts a wider lens, bringing water resource management and ecosystem conservation together with water and sanitation access targets in one integrated goal. As we grapple with our approach to this new agenda, it is timely to reflect on how we, as a sector, engage with environmental sustainability. This paper reviews recent literature at the intersection of WASH and environmental sustainability to identify current themes and future directions. Analysis of academic and non-academic sources was undertaken and then situated with reference to the planetary boundaries framework as a useful lens to ground the socio-ecological systems and processes upon which environmental sustainability depends. Findings point to both opportunities and gaps within current sector thinking, which can drive leadership from knowledge and research institutions towards better integration of access and environmental sustainability imperatives

Support mechanisms to strengthen equality and non-discrimination (EQND) in rural sanitation (Part 2 of 2)

A renewed focus on equity is being driven by the Human Rights to Water and Sanitation framework and Sustainable Development Goal 6.2, which emphasise the importance of adequate and equitable sanitation for all. However, as raised in Part 1 of this issue on equality and non-discrimination (EQND), there is evidence that CLTS processes for achieving community-wide outcomes are not always systematic, adequate, sustained, or sufficient to meet the needs of disadvantaged groups. A compilation of 50 CLTS and rural sanitation programmes around the world that significantly used support mechanisms was gathered to inform this issue. Our rapid review of the programmes found that although numerous trials existed, few had been taken to scale, few were located outside of Asia, and many did not have disaggregated monitoring and evaluation information that is publicly shared or collected at all. This issue therefore emphasises the importance of monitoring, evaluating and knowledge sharing processes in building an evidence base for facilitating equitable rural sanitation outcomes.Sid

Groundwater as a source of drinking water in southeast Asia and the Pacific: A multi-country review of current reliance and resource concerns

© 2019 by the authors. Groundwater is widely acknowledged to be an important source of drinking water in low-income regions, and it, therefore, plays a critical role in the realization of the human right to water. However, the proportion of households using groundwater compared with other sources is rarely quantified, with national and global datasets more focused on facilities-rather than resources-used. This is a significant gap in knowledge, particularly in light of efforts to expand water services in line with the inclusive and integrated agenda of the Sustainable Development Goals. Understanding the prevalence of groundwater reliance for drinking is critical for those involved in water services planning and management, so they can better monitor and advocate for management of water resources that supports sustainable services for households. This paper contributes data that can be used to strengthen the integration of resource considerations within water service delivery and inform the work of development partners supporting this area. We approach this issue from two perspectives. Firstly, we collate data on the proportion of households using groundwater as their primary drinking water source for 10 Southeast Asian and Pacific nations, finding an average of 62% (range of 17-93% for individual countries) of households in urban areas and 60% (range of 22-95%) of households in rural areas rely on groundwater for drinking. Together, these constitute 79% of the total population across the case study countries. Secondly, we review current and emerging groundwater resource concerns within each country, using a systems thinking approach to assess how groundwater resource issues influence household water services. Findings support the case for governments and development agencies to strengthen engagement with groundwater resource management as foundational for achieving sustainable water services for all

City Sanitation planning through a political economy lens

© 2019 Water Alternatives Association. While citywide sanitation planning is perceived to be an enabler of coordinated improvements in sanitation services for developing countries, intended outcomes have often been elusive. In order to illustrate how political economy, chosen planning approaches, and ideas about change and development have acted as determinants of outcomes, this paper draws on three case study countries that took qualitatively different approaches to sanitation planning - Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia. The analysis found that the assumptions informing the planning methods were often not valid, which then undermined the potential for successful implementation. Based on the analysis, the paper argues that urban sanitation planning and implementation in developing countries needs to be transformed to reduce the emphasis on comprehensiveness and instead emphasise flexibility, a learning orientation and strategically chosen incentives. This approach demands tighter cycles of planning and action, direct testing of assumptions, and an in-depth understanding of the local- and national-level political economy and the links between them. It requires innovation to be enabled, with funding mechanisms that focus on outcome rather than input. In this way it would be possible to shift away from the typical emphasis on prescriptive procedural planning steps and towards delivery of the much-needed improved sanitation outcomes

Are we doing the right thing? Critical questioning for city sanitation planning

Our aim is to provoke practitioners, policy makers and development agencies to reflect on their approaches to city sanitation planning and the assumptions that underlie them. The document is not intended as a critique, and it does not recommend a particular planning approach. Nor does it add to existing stocks of guidance materials on how to develop sanitation plans (e.g. Sanitation 21, WHO Sanitation Safety Planning Guide 2015, Community-Led Urban Environmental Sanitation Planning (CLUES), guidance for City Sanitation Strategies (SSK) in Indonesia and City Sanitation Plans (CSPs) in India etc). Rather, our premise is that raising awareness of underlying assumptions in sanitation planning may lead to better targeted approaches to sanitation planning, if and when those assumptions are shown not to match realities

A framework for exploring gender equality outcomes from WASH programmes

This paper aims to assist practitioners and researchers in planning, identifying, and documenting gender outcomes associated with water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) programmes by proposing a conceptual framework for classifying gender equality changes. Gender outcomes that have been attributed to WASH initiatives encompass those directly related to improved services as well as outcomes that move into areas of relationships, power, and status. There is a growing body of literature identifying WASH-related gender outcomes; however the types of outcomes described vary considerably and further work is needed to inform a comprehensive picture of WASH and gender links. The framework proposed in this paper is based on a synthesis of outcomes reported in WASH literature to date, empirical research in Fiji and Vanuatu, and insights from gender and development literature. It is hoped that the framework will support practitioners to engage with the inherent complexity of gender inquiry, contributing to sector knowledge about the potential for WASH initiatives to advance gender equality. © Practical Action Publishing, 2013