ESA/STAT/AC.320/22    Expert  Group  Mee5ng  on  Data  Disaggrega5on  27-­‐29  June  2016  New  York  

WASH  Data  Disaggrega5on  in  the    2030  Sustainable  Development  Agenda  By  Tom  Slaymaker    

 

WASH  Data  Disaggrega5on  in  the    2030  Sustainable  Development  Agenda  

 Expert  Group  Mee5ng  Disaggrega5on  

New  York,  27-­‐29  June  2016    Tom  Slaymaker    

tslaymaker@unicef.org    

   

Ensure  availability  and  sustainable  management  of  water  and  sanita5on  for  all  

Target  6.1  By  2030,  achieve  universal  and  equitable  access  to  safe  and  affordable  drinking  water  for  all  •  Propor5on  of  popula5on  using  safely  managed  drinking  water  

services  

Target  6.2  By  2030,  achieve  access  to  adequate  and  equitable  sanita=on  and  hygiene  for  all,  and  end  open  defeca=on,  paying  special  a?en=on  to  the  needs  of  women  and  girls  and  those  in  vulnerable  situa=ons  •  Propor5on  of  popula5on  using  safely  managed  sanita5on  

services;  including  a  handwashing  facility  with  soap  and  water  

Disaggrega5on:  'leave  no  one  behind'  

Where  relevant  by    §  income,    §  sex,    §  age,    §  race,    §  ethnicity,    §  migratory  status,  §  disability  and    §  geographic  loca5on,    §  or  other  characteris5cs  of  na5onal  relevance  

4  

Elements  specified  in  targets    •  universal  •  equitable    •  safe    •  affordable    •  adequate      •  open  defeca5on,    •  women  and  girls  •  vulnerable  situa5ons  

25  years  of  WASH  monitoring  

5  

Drinking  water  •  2.6  billion  people  gained  access  since  

1990;  663  million  without  •  91%  coverage  in  2015  for  improved  

sources  Sanita5on  •  68%  of  popula5on  uses  an  improved  

facility;  one  in  three  lack  a  private  improved  facility  

•  946  million  people  prac5ce  open  defeca5on,    

Based  on  official  na5onal  sta5s5cs  

•  Household  surveys  –  Demographic  and  Health  Surveys  (DHS),  Mul5ple  Indicator  Cluster  Surveys  (MICS),  Living  Standards  Measurement  Surveys  (LSMS)…  

•  Censuses  •  Administra5ve  records  •  In  2015:  n≈2000  datasets  •  Core  ques5ons  

6  

Household  level  ques5ons  WHAT IS THE MAIN SOURCE OF WATER FOR

MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD?

Piped water

Piped into dwelling 11

Piped into compound, yard or plot 12

Piped to neighbour 13

Public tap / standpipe 14

Tube Well / Borehole 21

Dug well

Protected well 31

Unprotected well 32

Water from spring

Protected spring 41

Unprotected spring 42

Rainwater collection 51

Tanker-truck 61

Cart with small tank / drum 71

Surface water (river, stream, dam, lake,

pond, canal, irrigation channel) 81

Other (specify) 96 7  

Except  responsibility  for  water  collec5on  WHO  USUALLY  GOES  TO  THIS  SOURCE  TO  COLLECT  THE  WATER  FOR  YOUR  

HOUSEHOLD?  

   

RECORD  THE  NAME  OF  THE  PERSON  AND  COPY  THE  LINE  

NUMBER  OF  THIS  PERSON  FROM  THE  LIST  OF  HOUSEHOLD  

MEMBERS  MODULE.  

   

IF  THE  PERSON  COLLECTING  WATER  FROM  THIS  SOURCE  IS  NOT  

A  MEMBER  OF  THIS  HOUSEHOLD  LEAVE  THE  NAME  BLANK  

AND  ENTER  ‘77’  FOR  LINE  NUMBER.  

 

 Name  

_______________________

_______  

   

Line  Number  ___    ___

8  

Inequali5es  by  country,  loca5on,  wealth  

9  

No  service  =  most  vulnerable  

10  

46 35

29 20

18 14 14 13

11 11

0 10 20 30 40 50

Bolivia Haiti

Venezuela Peru

Suriname Nicaragua Colombia

Brazil Ecuador

Honduras

Proportion of rural population practising open defecation (%), 2015

Open defecation is practised by at least one in ten living in rural areas in ten countries in 2015

20 19

15 15

12 11

9 7

6 6

5

0 10 20 30 40 50

Bolivia Colombia Ecuador

Peru El Salvador

Suriname Venezuela Guatemala Nicaragua

Haiti Panama

Proportion of rural population using surface water (%), 2015

At least 5% of the rural population used surface water in 11 countries in

2015

Sub-­‐na5onal  stra5fiers  in  LAC  region  

11  

0   5   10   15   20   25   30   35  

Disability  

Language  

Religion  

Literacy  

Ethnicity  

Region  

Educa5on  

Rural  and  urban  

Equity  stra5fiers  available  from  census  and  surveys  since  2010  

Census   Survey  

Inequali5es  by  sub-­‐na5onal  region  

12  

Indigenous  vs  na5onal  

13  

33

50 54

72

91

70

92

79 84 90

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

100

Panama CEN2010

Argentina CEN2010

Ecuador CEN2010

Mexico CEN2010

Uruguay CEN2011

Pop

ulat

ion

usin

g im

prov

ed

sani

tatio

n (%

)

Indigenous National

Other  common  ethnic  groups  

14  

84 92

74

90

33

50 54

91

0

20

40

60

80

100

Panama CEN2010

Argentina CEN2010

Ecuador CEN2010

Uruguay CEN2011

Pop

ulat

ion

usin

g im

prov

ed

sani

tatio

n (%

)

afrodescendent indigenous

Disability  

15  

Country   Indicator   Disabled   Na5onal  

Costa  Rica  (any  disability)  

Improved  water  Improved  sanita5on  

95  97  

95  97  

Ecuador  (“permanent”  disability)  

Improved  water  Improved  sanita5on  

81  77  

83  79  

Mexico  (physical  or  mental)  

Improved  water  Improved  sanita5on  

93  82  

93  84  

Panama  (any  disability  in  list)  

Improved  water  Improved  sanita5on  

92  69  

93  70  

Priori5es  iden5fied  by  JMP  Task  Force  

16  

Disaggrega5on   SDG  Priority  

JMP  Priority  

Income  (wealth  quin5les)   Yes   Yes  Affordability  (expenditure  vv  others)   Yes   Yes  Sex  (MHM,  5me  use,  violence)   Yes   Yes  Race,  ethnicity,  religion,  educa5on  (hhh)   Yes     Thema5c  Migratory  status  (?)   Yes   Thema5c  Disability/age  (accessibility)   Yes   Yes  Subna5onal,  informal  urban   Yes   Yes  

Extra  household  (ins5tu5ons)   Yes   Yes  

Guidance  needed  Household  characteris5cs  •  Harmonised  SDG  WASH  ques5ons  and  indicators  for  household  surveys  

and  2020  censuses  Individual  characteris5cs  •  Sex/age/disability  specific  WASH  indicators  (WASH  module  in  5me  use/

labour  force/disability  surveys)  •  Standards  for  classifica5on  of  ethnicity  and  migratory  status  Ins5tu5onal  sesngs  •  Stra5fying  and  sampling  facility  types  vs  exposed  popula5ons  Data  integra5on  •  Guidance  on  combining  census/survey  with  admin  and  geo-­‐spa5al  data    

17