Download to read offline
Uploaded byInternational WaterCentre
A3 d
1) Low income stable countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have made the most progress increasing access to water supply and sanitation between 1990 and 2008. 2) Connecting water sector planning and budgets to strengthened core government systems, like those seen in countries with Poverty Reduction Strategy Processes, positions countries to deliver services at scale. 3) Ethiopia has shown progress in rural water supply through national planning processes, strengthened local government budgets, and sector systems connected to core government systems and implemented countrywide.
More Related Content
A3 d
- 1. AMCOW Country StatusOverviewsof water supply and sanitation 2010
- 2. Outcomes:Progress and remainingdisparitiesPresentation overview$ServicesService delivery pathwaysThe process by which finance is turned into services and how to improve itFinance:How much has been spent and where it is coming from
- 3. What underpins progressin WSS coverage?Synthesis report scope32 countries in SSA
- 4. 95% of SSApopulation
- 5. 92% of SSAGDPComponentsUnderstanding past trends
- 6. Benchmarking service deliverypathways (scorecard)
- 7. Guidance to lineministries and development partners Number of people gaining access needs to be increased by ...4x for water supply9x for sanitation12m to 40m per year.7m to 61m per yearJMP data for 2008: Water supply 60%; Sanitation 32% Increased effort to meet MDGs: 3x for water supply ; 8 x for sanitation
- 8. Globally water supplycoverage improves with GDP ...
- 9. ... but inAfrica this relationship is far less clearAccelerate progress in countries that are struggling
- 10. Public interventions makea difference
- 11. Highlights the importanceof South-South learning Understanding trends and disparities through political economic classification of countries ...* Countries with that have received debt relief
- 12. Low income stablecountries have made the most progress between 1990 and 2008in increasing coverage of water supply
- 13. in reducing opendefecation in rural areas
- 14. in keeping upwith population growth in urban water supply (except for SA)
- 15. have more equitableoutcomes (access)
- 16. better quality ofserviceRural water supply increase 1990-2008
- 17. Low income stablecountries have made the most progress between 1990 and 2008in increasing coverage of water supply
- 18. in reducing opendefecation in rural areas
- 19. in keeping upwith population growth in urban water supply (except for SA)
- 20. have more equitableoutcomes (access)
- 21. better quality ofserviceReduction in open defecation in rural areas 1990-2008
- 22. Low income stablecountries have attracted most aid per un-served capitaThe $25 bn in WSS aid has supported over 200m people to gain access to water supply across Sub Saharan AfricaAid flows per un-served capita 1995-2008 Cycle of multiple and growing transactions $US per un-servedcapitaStable
Editor's Notes
- #5 Compared JMP and country dataJMP -> water: 54% to 63%, sanitation: 27% to 34%Country data -> water: 46% to 58%, sanitation: 24% to 36%.
- #9 Change to box chartsReducing open defecation in rural areas: LICNF 12%, LICF 7%, RR 3%Increasing urban sanitation coverage: LICNF > LICF and RR
- #10 Change to box chartsReducing open defecation in rural areas: LICNF 12%, LICF 7%, RR 3%Increasing urban sanitation coverage: LICNF > LICF and RR
- #11 Low income non-fragile countries received more aid per capita for each unserved person: 3x LICNF and 2x RRSouth Africa – aid very small % of overall spend <5% … 95% domesticNot possible to separate past ODA to sanitation from water supply
- #12 Regional scores. Benchmarking of service delivery pathways done in each subsector in each country Policy (Targets in PRSPs, subsector policies, defined institutional roles)Expansion and uptake; Budget (sufficient, comprehensive, identifiable); Equity (criteria for matching need with resources, participation in planning, monitoring of equity)Ingredients – that depend on each other
- #13 Benchmarking each subsector in each country
- #14 LICNF have the strongest sector governance
- #17 11% to 62% according to Government figuresBuilding Service Delivery pathwaysUrban water supply: National utility Rural water supply: Unitary versus Federal systemSanitation: Inter-ministerial coordination.
- #18 The service delivery pathways for sanitation are also notably weaker than those for water supply, Three factors warrant specific mention: First, despite wide acceptance that policy and program development in sanitation needs to be lead by a single designated government agency (e.g. eThekwini Declaration – Commitment 5) only a 1/3 of countries taking part in the CSO2 had achieved this initial step.Second, there remains considerable policy uncertainty about the countries’ position on sanitation subsidies. This leads to: Inconsistent practice in sanitation service delivery both across development agencies and between agencies and government. But, more importantly the lack of policy clarity undermines subsector investment planning. Misconception that no subsidy means no need for a public sector budget – no money for local government Third, monitoring the impact of public interventions to improve sanitation are all but absent. This monitoring is needed to understand and improve the relationship between public interventions and the quality and quantity of household uptake
- #19 Project investment with TA to:Prime fragile state capacity for government-led service delivery – so that the sector engages in the PRSP process and accesses domestic resources when they become availableProgrammatic investment with TA for implementation support to: consolidate subsector service delivery pathwaysBudget support to: back subsectors that have completed the transition to government-led service delivery pathways
- #20 Project investment with TA to:Prime fragile state capacity for government-led service delivery – so that the sector engages in the PRSP process and accesses domestic resources when they become availableProgrammatic investment with TA for implementation support to: consolidate subsector service delivery pathwaysBudget support to: back subsectors that have completed the transition to government-led service delivery pathways
- #21 Project investment with TA to:Prime fragile state capacity for government-led service delivery – so that the sector engages in the PRSP process and accesses domestic resources when they become availableProgrammatic investment with TA for implementation support to: consolidate subsector service delivery pathwaysBudget support to: back subsectors that have completed the transition to government-led service delivery pathways
- #22 WSP a different/new program -New Global Strategy: Scaling up services through knowledge, leveraging investments -Delivering results: RFs + Indicators and a performance monitoring system to track progress and results-Focused business areas