2016•Environment and UrbanizationOpen access

Missing the Millennium Development Goal targets for water and sanitation in urban areas

David Satterthwaite

Open full text 168 citations

Abstract

This paper reviews progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for water and sanitation in urban areas. Drawing on UN data, it shows the disastrous performance of many low- and middle-income nations in relation to the goal of halving the proportion without drinking water sources piped on premises and improved sanitation between 1990 and 2015. It also describes how even such a poor performance is actually understating the problem because of deficiencies in the data available. For water, there are no data sources with global coverage on who has “sustainable access to safe drinking water” (what the MDGs specify). UN statistics record whether households have drinking water sources piped on premises, but this does not necessarily mean the water is safe to drink or that there is a regular, reliable supply (what is implied by sustainable access). For what is termed “improved” or “basic” sanitation, the bar is set too low in the quality of provision needed in urban areas, so large numbers of urban dwellers said to have improved or basic sanitation still lack sanitation that greatly reduces health risks. The paper emphasizes that assessments of provision for water and sanitation need to make allowances for different contexts; what can work well in rural contexts does not do so in large and dense urban agglomerations. The paper ends with a discussion of what the experience with the MDGs for water and sanitation implies for the Sustainable Development Goals.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This paper reviews progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for water and sanitation in urban areas. Drawing on UN data, it shows the disastrous performance of many low- and middle-income nations in relation to the goal of halving the proportion without drinking water sources piped on premises and improved sanitation between 1990 and 2015. It also describes how even such a poor performance is actually understating the problem because of deficiencies in the data available. For water, there are no data sources with global coverage on who has “sustainable access to safe drinking water” (what the MDGs specify). UN statistics record whether households have drinking water sources piped on premises, but this does not necessarily mean the water is safe to drink or that there is a regular, reliable supply (what is implied by sustainable access). For what is termed “improved” or “basic” sanitation, the bar is set too low in the quality of provision needed in urban areas, so large numbers of urban dwellers said to have improved or basic sanitation still lack sanitation that greatly reduces health risks. The paper emphasizes that assessments of provision for water and sanitation need to make allowances for different contexts; what can work well in rural contexts does not do so in large and dense urban agglomerations. The paper ends with a discussion of what the experience with the MDGs for water and sanitation implies for the Sustainable Development Goals.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 168 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This paper reviews progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) for water and sanitation in urban areas. Drawing on UN data, it shows the disastrous performance of many low- and middle-income nations in relation to the goal of halving the proportion without drinking water sources piped on premises and improved sanitation between 1990 and 2015. It also describes how even such a poor performance is actually understating the problem because of deficiencies in the data available. For water, there are no data sources with global coverage on who has “sustainable access to safe drinking water” (what the MDGs specify). UN statistics record whether households have drinking water sources piped on premises, but this does not necessarily mean the water is safe to drink or that there is a regular, reliable supply (what is implied by sustainable access). For what is termed “improved” or “basic” sanitation, the bar is set too low in the quality of provision needed in urban areas, so large numbers of urban dwellers said to have improved or basic sanitation still lack sanitation that greatly reduces health risks. The paper emphasizes that assessments of provision for water and sanitation need to make allowances for different contexts; what can work well in rural contexts does not do so in large and dense urban agglomerations. The paper ends with a discussion of what the experience with the MDGs for water and sanitation implies for the Sustainable Development Goals.

Key concepts: Sanitation, Millennium Development Goals, Open defecation, Sustainable development, Water supply, Business, Environmental planning, Improved sanitation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Missing the Millennium Development Goal targets for water and sanitation in urban areas — Research Paper | ScholarLens