Diapositiva 1

Download Report

Transcript Diapositiva 1

"Looking through the GLAAS"

Ministerial Dialogue on Sanitation and Water

Washington, DC 22 April 2010

Federico Properzi Peregrine Swann Project Manager [email protected]

Senior Adviser [email protected]

WHO GLAAS Team

1 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

Context and content of presentation

    Data from first UN-Water GLAAS report – launched yesterday 21 April Report includes data from nearly all donors and 42 developing countries WHO GLAAS team worked closely with World Bank WSP team that is preparing the Country Status Overviews for 32 African countries Strong collaboration between UN-Water GLAAS and WSP-CSO  Presentation looks at: – Impact of poor sanitation and unsafe water – Targeting of resources – – • • • • Who's providing the external resources?

Who's receiving ODA?

Who's not receiving ODA?

Are resources focused on the poor and the un-served?

What is happening at the country level Some highlights

2 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

Outline 1.

Impact 2.

Priorities 3.

Targeting 4.

Capacities 5.

Partnerships 6.

Highlights 3 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

1. Impact of poor sanitation and unsafe water HEALTH

 2.2 million preventable deaths of children  Diarrhoea the second leading contributor to global disease burden  For children under 15, impact of diarrhoea greater than that of HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB

combined

 Overall around 9% of the global burden of disease attributable to poor sanitation and unsafe water

EDUCATION

 11% increase in girls attendance in Bangladesh – UNICEF study  Evidence of increased learning performance when worm infections reduced

ECONOMY

 $ economic benefits of many times the $ invested  World Bank estimate between 2% and 7% of GDP lost through poor sanitation and unsafe water in developing countries

4 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

1. Impact of poor sanitation and unsafe water

Afghanistan Burkina Faso Chad Ethiopia Liberia Madagascar Mali Mauritania Mozambique Niger Uganda Yemen 0

% of deaths attibutable to WASH

5 10 15 20 25 30

Source: Safer Water, Better Health WHO, 2008

5 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

2. Priorities Donor priority sectors 6 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

15%

2. Priorities Aid for health and education has outpaced aid for sanitation and drinking-water

Water and sanitation Education Health, population, HIV/AIDs 10% 5% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

7 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

2. Priorities Developing countries report insufficient funds to meet the sanitation and water MDG target 8 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

UN-Water GLAAS 2010 Report Recommendation No. 1

Greater political commitment to sanitation and drinking water by donors and developing countries

9 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

3. Targeting 42% of WASH aid to low-income countries 10 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

3. Targeting Global trends of WASH aid Aid flows for basic water and sanitation remained relatively constant at US$ 1.1 billion, and aid flows for large systems increased from US$ 2.6 billion to US$ 4.3 billion from 2000 to 2008 11 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

3. Targeting Poor targeting to unserved and poor populations 12 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

UN-Water GLAAS 2010 Report Recommendation No. 2

Target resources better to reach the sanitation and drinking-water MDG Target

13 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

4. Capacities Institutional roles and responsibilities need to be better defined and operationalized 14 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

4. Capacities Investment programmes in sanitation are lagging behind 15 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

4. Capacities Staff shortages primarily due to inadequate budgets 16 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

UN-Water GLAAS 2010 Report Recommendation No. 3

Strengthen national systems to plan, implement and monitor delivery of services

17 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

5. Partnerships Procedures to promote local stakeholder participation are weak 18 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

5. Partnerships Most aid recipients have a multitude of donors disbursing funds 19 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

5. Partnerships Aid disbursements generally follow commitment levels 20 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

UN-Water GLAAS 2010 Report Recommendation No. 4

Stronger partnerships to develop and implement national sanitation and drinking-water plans

21 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

6. Highlights Donors

 WASH aid

increased

between 2000 and 2008: by over 150% to Africa and over 50% globally  Over the same period, WASH aid

reduced

(from approx 6.3% to 4.7%) as a % of overall aid  42% of aid targeted to LICs (plus some regional aid)  Top 12 priority recipients receive 50% of WSS aid  ODA for basic services

declined

years from 27% to 16% over the last five  Donors targeted 37% of WASH aid to sanitation against 63% to water  Predictability of donor funding as perceived by GLAAS countries

increasing 22 | UN-Water Global Annual Assessment of Sanitation and Drinking-Water

6. Highlights Developing countries

 Most countries developed national MDG targets

but insufficient

financial flows to WASH to meet these national MDG targets in many countries  Governments spend 20% of WASH funds on sanitation (median figure)  Only one third of countries implement criteria for targeting resources to the poor for water and hardly any for sanitation  Most countries have developed WASH policies but

only one half

clearly defined and operationalized roles for WASH institutions have  Most countries are developing some kind of HRD plan, but

many HR obstacles

are cited  Most countries have an annual review process but

few

made in previous reviews update undertakings  Around one third of sub-sectors utilize

over

20% utilize

less

than 50% 75% of donor commitments, but 

23 |

Local participation in planning and implementation of programmes not consistently

applied

in any of the four sub-sectors (urban/rural water/sanitation)

THANK YOU

Federico Properzi Project Manager Peregrine Swann Senior Adviser [email protected]

[email protected]