WHAT IS GLAAS?

The UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-water (GLAAS) monitors the efforts and approaches to extend and sustain water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) systems and services.

Between 1990 and 2010 in SA & SEA, over 870 million people gained access to improved water sources and 940 million people gained access to improved sanitation In SA & SEA financing is reported as insufficient, especially for sanitation, and the institutional capacity to absorb what is available is limited. The danger of slippage against the MDG target is real.

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.

Over three quarter of countries surveyed in SA and SEA fully recognize the right to water however only 30% fully

recognize the right to sanitation

Globally countries report strong progress in adopting and publishing WASH sector policies

UN-Water Global Analysis and Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

THE cHALLENGE of ExTENDING AND SUSTAINING SErvIcES

2013 rEPOrT

Despite progress on setting targets and establishing policies, output is insufficient

to meet national targets in SA and SEA

Despite the global financial crisis, external support for WASH increased from 2008 to 2010

Percentage of population using improved sanitation facilities (2010)

Use of improved sanitation, 2010

91–100%

76–90%

50–75%

<50%

No or insuf�cient data

Not applicable

Use of improved sanitation, 2010

91–100%

76–90%

50–75%

<50%

No or insuf�cient data

Not applicable

91–100%

76–90%

50–75%

<50%

No or insuf�cient data

Not applicable

Use of drinking-water from an improved source, 2010

Fully recognized, both urban and rural Not yet developed

ProgressingFully recognized, urban or rural

Data not availableNot developed, but progressing in urban or rural Not applicable

Not a survey participant

Percentage of deaths attributable to inadequate WASH

>15%

Data not available

≤1%

>1–5%

>5–15%

Not applicable

Percentage of deaths attributable to inadequate WASH

>15%

Data not available

≤1%

>1–5%

>5–15%

Not applicable

Percentage of population using drinking-water from an improved source (2010)

Percentage of deaths attributable to inadequate WASH

SOUTH ASIA

AND SOUTH

EAST ASIA

HIGHLIGHTS

Use of improved sanitation, 2010

91–100%

76–90%

50–75%

<50%

No or insuf�cient data

Not applicable

20112009

20112009

Sanitation

Drinking-water

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

% of countries with agreed and published sector policy

20082010

-0.2

0.3

0.8

1.3

1.8

2.3

1.5

2.1

1.01.3

ODA non-concessional lending$US

bill

ion

com

mitm

ents

89%

67%

33% 33%

95%

73%

18%27%

0%

100%

Targets in place Policies adopted Perceived adequate�nance

Annual progress >75% or more to meet target

% o

f cou

ntrie

s re

por

ting

atta

inm

ent

South and South East AsiaRest of the world

The total amount of development aid, including non-concessional lending, for sanitation and water for SA & SEA increased from US$ 2.5 billion in 2008 to US$ 3.4 billion in 2010.

In 2011, countries reported substantive political commitmentsto WASH, increasing funding allocations, and leadership andcoordination among implementing agencies. The majority

of countries have established transparent WASH serviceprovision 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 increasinglyadopted in laws or policies. Accountability can be improved, as most countries do not include consumers in planning andonly half have established regular review processes.

Is the right to sanitation explicitly recognized in policy or law?

– South Asia and South East Asia Highlights

SUSTAINABILITY: There is a risk of slippage on progress made unless sufficient financial and human resource support is given to sustain operation and maintenance.

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.

Participating governments in South Asia report that less than a quarter of WASH funding is allocated to

support operation and maintenance of services.

Global data suggest that less than 10% of external WASH funding is directed towards maintenance of

existing services

A fifth of countries indicate that revenues cover less than 80% of operating costs for urban utilities

in SA & SEA (water)

Over two thirds of the countries surveyed in SA & SEA report insufficient staff to operate and maintain urban

and rural drinking-water systems

6

10

0

3

12

1 0 2 4 6 8

10 12 14

Num

ber

of c

ount

ries Urban Drinking-water

Rural Drinking-water

Yes, but insuf�cientto meet needs

Yes, suf�cientto meet needs

No

57%

7%

36% New services

Maintain/replace existing services

Increase service or treatment levels78%

22%

Capital expenditure

Operation and maintenance expenditure

40%

40%

20% Operating ratio greater than 1.2

Operating ratio between 0.8 and 1.2

Operating ratio less than 0.8

Is there sufficient staff to operate and maintain urban and rural drinking-water systems?

In SA & SEA sanitation funding remains inadequate Average absorption rates of government capital commitments from SA & SEA are low

>75% of domestic commitments for both urban and rural

50–75% of domestic commitments

>75% of domestic commitments for urban or rural

Data not available

<50% of domestic commitments for urban or rural

Not applicable

Not a survey participant

<50% of domestic commitments for both urban and rural

>75% of what is needed for both urban and rural

<50% of what is needed for both urban and rural

50–75% of what is needed

>75% of what is needed for urban or rural

Data not available

<50% of what is needed for urban or rural

Not applicable

Not a survey participant

>75% of domestic commitments for both urban and rural

50–75% of domestic commitments

>75% of domestic commitments for urban or rural

Data not available

<50% of domestic commitments for urban or rural

Not applicable

Not a survey participant

<50% of domestic commitments for both urban and rural

>75% of what is needed for both urban and rural

<50% of what is needed for both urban and rural

50–75% of what is needed

>75% of what is needed for urban or rural

Data not available

<50% of what is needed for urban or rural

Not applicable

Not a survey participant

Are financial flows sufficient to meet the MDG Sanitation target?

What is the percentage of domestic capital sanitation commitments utilized?

– South Asia and South East Asia Highlights

Targeting of external support for WASH can be further improved to assist those in need

Only 24% of sanitation and drinking-water aid is targeted to South East Asia and South Asia though the region currently holds 32% of the worlds unserved population in water and 46.8% of the unserved population in sanitation.

Total aid commitments for sanitation and drinking-water have been maintained between 2008 and 2010 though they have

increased for basic systems and decreased for large systems

The majority of ODA to SA & SEA is in the form of loans

Funds in respondent countries in South Asia are largely targeted for extending services in urban areas

responses from countries in SA and SEA indicate a wide variation in WASH funding sources.

77%

23%

Urban

Rural

Northern Africa

Southern Asia

Latin America and Caribbean

Sub-Saharan Africa

Western Asia

Eastern Asia

Oceania

South-eastern Asia

Caucasus and Central Asia

Developed countries

Not applicable

12%

27%

8%

9%

2%

15%12%

3%3%2%

NOTE: An additional 7% of global sanitation and water ODA is targeted to regional programmes 17

19

29

29

45

83

86

107

111

358

907

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Norway

Italy

Denmark

Finland

Germany

Netherlands

United States

France

Korea

AsDB SpecialFunds

IDA

Japan

WASH aid to SA & SEAWASH aid to other parts of the world

Top 12 average annual commitments to sanitation and drinking-water to SA & SEA countries, 2008-2010 (US$ millions, constant 2009 $US)

57

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Aid

com

mitm

ent

to S

outh

and

Sou

th-e

ast

Asi

a (U

S$

mill

ions

, con

stan

t 20

09 $

US

)

Hygiene educationWater resources, rivers, waste managementPolicy and administrationLarge systemsBasic systems

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Timor-LesteThailand

PhilippinesNepal

AfghanistanPakistanSri LankaIndonesia

BangladeshIndia

Vietnam

Top 11 average annual commitments to sanitation and drinking-water, 2008–2010 (US$ millions, constant 2009 $US)

LoansGrants

Financial resources and expenditure distribution for WASH are perceived to be the greatest limiting factor to meet targets.

Drinking-water continues to absorb the majority of WASHfunding, even in countries with relatively high drinking-watersupply coverage and relatively low sanitation coverage.

countries also indicate that expenditures are largely targetedfor extending services in urban areas, even in countrieswhere urban areas are relatively well served and rural areasare off-track. financial reporting in respondent countries in South and South East Asia is limited with only a few countries reporting on breakdown of spending. Many respondent countries however were able to report on sources of funding. The responses on funding sources within SA and SEA varied significantly.

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Other (ODA, Commercial)

Self-supply

Tariffs

Central regional andlocal government

% �nancial sourcesfor WASH

Afgha

nista

nBan

glades

hBhu

tan

India

Nepal

Pakist

anSri

Lank

aTh

ailan

dViet

Nam

Iran

(Islam

ic Rep

ublic

of)

– South Asia and South East Asia 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.

• over a third respondent of countries in South Asia and two thirds in South East Asia 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 less than half of the respondent countries in South Asia and a third in South East Asia were able to provide data for staff in place and less than 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 glaas@who.int

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 in SA & SEA exist, but in many cases are still not being used in planning

respondent countries in SA & SEA report that under 60% of urban/rural sanitation and drinking-

water sectors use information systems for decision making

Over half of respondent countries in SA & SEA failed to monitor against established targets for

school sanitation

Less than half of country respondents in SA & SEA could report on improved drinking-water coverage in health-care centres

The 2012 UN-Water GLAAS report presents data received from 75 developing countries, covering all the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) regions, of which 17 from SA & SEA, 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.

56% 39%

Yes and used

Under development

No

5%

8

6

3

8

6

2

0

2

4

6

8

10

Targets, butnot monitored

No targets or strategyfor schools

Num

ber

of c

ount

ries Urban Sanitation

Rural Sanitation

Targets includedand monitored

Review and used in planning, both urban and rural No reviews performed

Review, but not used in planning

Review and used in planning, urban or rural

Data not available

Review, but not used in planning for urban or rural Not applicable

Not a survey participant

≥90%

75–89%

50–74%

<50%

Not a survey participant

Data not available

Not applicable

Is there a national information system used to inform decision-making?

Is there an annual or biennial review of the sector?

What percentage of health-care facilities have improved water supplies?

Have national sanitation targets for schools been established?