action on water matters of factwaterwiki.net/images/e/ee/hdr_2006_presskit_en.pdfsupply and...

Action on Water

World leaders have pledged to achieve by 2015 the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), including the over-arching goal of cutting extreme poverty in half. UNDP, using its worldwide network, is coordinating global and national efforts to reach these Goals. As the 2006 Human Development Report (HDR 2006), Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis, emphasizes, achieving the eight MDGs very much depends on strengthening water governance at local, national, regional and global levels. The main imperatives of the Report are:

Make water a human right—and mean it Draw up national strategies for water and sanitation Support national plans with international aid Develop a global action plan

UNDP is helping catalyze efforts toward achievement of

the MDGs through its Water Governance Programme

(www.undp.org/water/), and stands ready to work with

UN-Water and other partners in advancing the Report’s

recommendations.

UNDP’s strategy in strengthening water governance—and

thereby boosting progress toward the MDGs—includes:

Incorporating water management, water supply and

sanitation into national development and poverty-

reduction strategies

Catalyzing financing for improved water governance

Supporting and participating in global, regional,

national and local dialogue on water governance.

Helping countries consider water resources in their

plans for adapting to climate change

Building capacity to manage water resources effectively

Promoting women’s empowerment and human rights

as essential components of effective water governance

UNDP’s Water Governance Programme is structured

around six inter-related areas of support:

1. National strategies for equitable management and

governance of water

(Links to HDR2006 Chapters 1, 2, 3 and 4)

This area aims to help partner countries fight poverty and

achieve sustainable development through global

MATTERS OF FACT

• UNDP’s Water Governance Programme is active in over 150 countries, in four thematic areas of support: Water Supply, Sanitation, Transboundary Waters Manage-ment, and Water Resources Management. In the graph on page 2 water supply and sanitation are represented as one section.

• The Water Governance portfolio totals $1.5 billion including cash and in-kind co-financing.

• The International Waters focal area of the Global Environment Facility (GEF) represents the principal source of funding for the Transboundary Waters Management area.

• UNDP participates in UN-Water, Global Water Partnership, Water and Sanitation Programme, World Water Assessment Programme, World Water Forum.

• Partners include governments, bilateral and multilateral donors, UN agencies, NGOs and private foundations

• UNDP has set up 11 national and 9 regional water management capacity-building networks, including 300 member institutions

• UNDP draws on expertise from its Environment & Energy network of 1,413 members

“ I fully support the call for a Global Action Plan to tackle the growing water and sanitation crisis. As the 2006 Human Development Report highlights, each one of the eight Millennium Development Goals is inextric-ably tied to the next, so if we fail on the water and sanitation goal, hope of reaching the other seven rapidly fades. Either we take concerted action now to bring clean water and sanitation to the world’s poor, or we consign millions of people to lives of avoidable poverty, poor health and diminished opportunities, and perpetuate deep inequalities within and between countries. We have a collective responsibility to succeed.

— Kemal Derviş, UNDP Administrator

advocacy, policy development and coordination of action,

and by bringing water-resources management, water

supply and sanitation into national development plans.

Programme results include:

Assisted Kazakhstan in developing its national

Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) plan;

similar plans are under development in more than 50 other

countries, including all Small Island Developing States, in

support of global targets for sustainable development.

Supported Chad, China, Kenya, Sudan, Ukraine and

others in conceiving national plans, tariff structures,

legislation and regulatory systems for water and sanitation.

Served as lead author of water-governance chapter in

World Water Development Report produced by UN Water.

With the Poverty and Environment Partnership, UNDP

has helped development partners craft policy that

recognizes the links between poverty and water issues,

maximizes the value of investments and gives top priority

to the most pressing concerns.

2. Local action on water and sanitation

(Links to HDR 2006 Chapters 1, 2, 3 and 5)

This area focuses on promoting decentralized water

management that is responsive to local conditions and the

needs of poor and marginalized groups. UNDP helps

communities take an active role in IWRM, and promotes

safe and ecosystem-based water supply and sanitation

systems and technologies. Results include:

Support to community-level projects on water-

resources management, water supply and sanitation in

over 30 countries. In Rajasthan, India, for example, that

support aided construction of 7,500 community water-

harvesting structures in the form of dams and ponds to rid

the area of water shortages.

In India and Sri Lanka, the success of pilot projects in

ecologically friendly sanitation has elicited demand from

municipal and state governments to scale up sanitation

services. Ecological sanitation investments are backing the

ongoing restoration of Havana Bay, Cuba and Lake

Manzala, Egypt.

A broad-based programme to implement ‘eco-friendly’

municipal sanitation in Mexico has helped local organiza-

tions design and manufacture ‘ecosan’ toilets, and demon-

strated successful household and public ‘ecosan’ systems.

3. Cooperation on Transboundary Waters Management

(Links to HDR 2006 Chapter 6)

This area focuses on strengthening the joint management

of transboundary waterbodies—rivers, lakes and aquifers

that cross national borders—by setting priorities, building

consensus on governance reforms and investments,

nurturing and strengthening institutions, and supporting

the implementation of action programmes. UNDP’s

results here include:

The Programme supports transboundary waters-

management programmes in 15 lake and river basins with

over 100 countries participating.

UNDP and its partners completed Transboundary

Diagnostic Analyses, in 12 shared waterbodies which set

priorities in managing transboundary waters and assessed

both causes and impacts of agreed priority transboundary

issues.

Governments completed and adopted 12 UNDP-

supported Strategic Action Programmes to address agreed

threats to their shared waterbodies. Implementation of

these is underway in six waterbodies.

Catalytic investments and policy reforms significantly

cut pollution loads in the Danube, and the Black Sea

ecosystem is recovering.

Adoption of five regional legal waterbody mechanisms.

Eight regional transboundary waters-management

institutions were created or strengthened.

4. Adaptation to climate change

(Links to HDR 2006 Chapter 4)

This area helps countries assess their vulnerability to

climate change and incorporate those risks into national

development planning. It includes strengthening of water

institutions and prioritizing of adaptation projects. A

principal concern is to address the disproportionate

UNDP Water Portfolio by Region

15%

20%

24%

21%

13%7% Africa

AsiaArab States

Europe/CISLat in America

Global Focus

UNDP Water Portfolio by Thematic Area

22%

23%55%

Water Supply andSanitation

Water ResourcesManagement

TransboundaryWatersManagement

vulnerability of poor people to climate change. Results

include:

More than 200 individual National Communications, on

climate change and adaptation, 29 National Adaptation

Programmes of Actions; 22 pilot projects on adaptation in

43 countries.

In Zimbabwe and Mozambique, UNDP and partners

linked global climate models to river-basin hydrology to

develop climate-change adaptation strategies.

Support to community-based drought management in

over 400 villages in the Marwar region of India.

5. Gender equity in water governance

(Cross-cutting theme in HDR 2006)

UNDP supports policies, programmes and projects that

make women’s empowerment a central consideration in

water-resources management, and thus foster human

development for both women and men. Results include:

Development of Mainstreaming Gender in Water

Management: A Resource Guide, an interactive web- and

CD-ROM-based guide providing tools and resources in four

languages.

Why gender matters is a tutorial for water managers,

available in English and Spanish, that was disseminated to

all UNDP country offices and used by 300 training

institutions.

6. Capacity development

(Cross-cutting theme in HDR 2006)

The principal aim is to strengthen local institutions as

builders of capacity and centres of knowledge, and to

improve access to experience, expertise and tools for

improved water-resources management, water supply and

sanitation. UNDP supports networks of knowledge that can

maximize programmes’ impact and adapt experience and

good practices for use elsewhere. Results include:

Established a capacity-building network for water-

resources management, Cap-Net. Conducted 141 courses

for 1,000 trainees to date.

UNDP and partners have produced training and resource

materials on a broad range of topics including legislation,

institutional arrangements, network-management tools,

local water management, water supply and sanitation,

ecological sanitation, conflict resolution and national IWRM

planning.

UN Water UN Water is the focal point for coordinating UN system

activities in the area of water resources. It comprises the 24

UN agencies active in water and sanitation, among them

UNDP. UN Water is the interagency mechanism that

promotes coherence in, and coordination of, UN system

actions aimed at the implementation of the agenda

defined by the Millennium Declaration and the World

Summit on Sustainable Development. www.unwater.org/

* * *

For more information contact:

Andrew Hudson

Principal Technical Advisor, International Waters and

Officer-in-Charge, Water Governance Programme

United Nations Development Programme

Global Environment Facility

Tel: + 1 212 906 6228

Fax: + 1 212 906 6998

Email: [email protected]

or visit:

www.undp.org/water

http://www.undp.org/gef/05/portfolio/iw.html

HDI rank

Low human development

HDI rank

High human development

http://hdr.undp.org

1 Norway 2 Iceland 3 Australia 4 Ireland 5 Sweden 6 Canada 7 Japan 8 United States 9 Switzerland 10 Netherlands 11 Finland 12 Luxembourg 13 Belgium 14 Austria 15 Denmark 16 France 17 Italy 18 United Kingdom 19 Spain 20 New Zealand 21 Germany 22 Hong Kong, China (SAR) 23 Israel 24 Greece 25 Singapore 26 Korea, Rep. of 27 Slovenia 28 Portugal 29 Cyprus 30 Czech Republic 31 Barbados 32 Malta 33 Kuwait 34 Brunei Darussalam 35 Hungary 36 Argentina 37 Poland 38 Chile 39 Bahrain 40 Estonia 41 Lithuania 42 Slovakia 43 Uruguay 44 Croatia 45 Latvia 46 Qatar 47 Seychelles 48 Costa Rica 49 United Arab Emirates 50 Cuba 51 Saint Kitts and Nevis 52 Bahamas 53 Mexico 54 Bulgaria 55 Tonga 56 Oman 57 Trinidad and Tobago 58 Panama 59 Antigua and Barbuda 60 Romania 61 Malaysia 62 Bosnia and Herzegovina 63 Mauritius

64 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 65 Russian Federation 66 Macedonia, TFYR 67 Belarus 68 Dominica 69 Brazil 70 Colombia 71 Saint Lucia 72 Venezuela, RB 73 Albania 74 Thailand 75 Samoa (Western) 76 Saudi Arabia 77 Ukraine 78 Lebanon 79 Kazakhstan 80 Armenia 81 China 82 Peru 83 Ecuador 84 Philippines 85 Grenada 86 Jordan 87 Tunisia 88 Saint Vincent and the

Grenadines 89 Suriname 90 Fiji 91 Paraguay 92 Turkey 93 Sri Lanka 94 Dominican Republic 95 Belize 96 Iran, Islamic Rep. of 97 Georgia 98 Maldives 99 Azerbaijan 100 Occupied Palestinian

Territories 101 El Salvador 102 Algeria 103 Guyana 104 Jamaica 105 Turkmenistan 106 Cape Verde 107 Syrian Arab Republic 108 Indonesia 109 Viet Nam 110 Kyrgyzstan 111 Egypt 112 Nicaragua 113 Uzbekistan 114 Moldova, Rep. of 115 Bolivia 116 Mongolia 117 Honduras 118 Guatemala 119 Vanuatu 120 Equatorial Guinea 121 South Africa 122 Tajikistan 123 Morocco 124 Gabon

125 Namibia 126 India 127 São Tomé and Principe 128 Solomon Islands 129 Cambodia 130 Myanmar 131 Botswana 132 Comoros 133 Lao People’s Dem. Rep. 134 Pakistan 135 Bhutan 136 Ghana 137 Bangladesh 138 Nepal 139 Papua New Guinea 140 Congo 141 Sudan ac 142 Timor-Leste 143 Madagascar 144 Cameroon 145 Uganda 146 Swaziland

147 Togo 148 Djibouti 149 Lesotho 150 Yemen 151 Zimbabwe 152 Kenya 153 Mauritania 154 Haiti 155 Gambia 156 Senegal 157 Eritrea 158 Rwanda 159 Nigeria 160 Guinea 161 Angola 162 Tanzania, U. Rep. of 163 Benin 164 Côte d’Ivoire 165 Zambia 166 Malawi 167 Congo, Dem. Rep. of the 168 Mozambique 169 Burundi 170 Ethiopia 171 Chad 172 Central African Republic 173 Guinea-Bissau 174 Burkina Faso 175 Mali 176 Sierra Leone 177 Niger

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEXThe HDI measures achievements in terms of life expectancy, educational attainment and adjusted real income

HDI rank

Medium human development

22 Human De velopmenT RepoRT 2006

The Millennium Development Goals are the world’s time-bound

targets for overcoming extreme poverty and extending human

freedom. Representing something more than a set of quantitative

benchmarks to be attained by 2015, they encapsulate a broad vi-

sion of shared development priorities. That vision is rooted in the

simple idea that extreme poverty and gross disparities of opportu-

nity are not inescapable features of the human condition but a cur-

able affliction whose continuation diminishes us all and threatens

our collective security and prosperity.

The multifaceted targets set under the Millennium Development

Goals cut across a vast array of interlinked dimensions of develop-

ment, ranging from the reduction of extreme poverty to gender equal-

ity to health, education and the environment. Each dimension is linked

through a complex web of interactions. Sustained progress in any

one area depends critically on advances across all the other areas. A

lack of progress in any one area can hold back improvements across

a broad front. Water and sanitation powerfully demonstrate the link-

ages. Without accelerated progress in these areas many countries

will miss the Millennium Development Goals. Apart from consigning

millions of the world’s poorest people to lives of avoidable poverty,

poor health and diminished opportunities, such an outcome would

perpetuate deep inequalities within and between countries. While

there is more to human development than the Millennium Develop-

ment Goals, the targets set provide a useful frame of reference for

understanding the linkages between progress in different areas—and

the critical importance of progress in water and sanitation.

Eight reasons for the world to act on water and sanitation—links to the Millennium Development Goals

MillenniumDevelopmentGoal Whygovernmentsshouldact Howgovernmentsshouldact

Goal 1 Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger

• The absence of clean water and adequate sanitation is a major cause of poverty and malnutrition:

• One in five people in the developing world—1.1 billion in all—lacks access to an improved water source.

• One in two people—2.6 billion in all—lacks access to adequate sanitation.

• Diseases and productivity losses linked to water and sanitation in developing countries amount to 2% of GDP, rising to 5% in Sub-Saharan Africa—more than the region gets in aid.

• In many of the poorest countries only 25% of the poorest households have access to piped water in their homes, compared with 85% of the richest.

• The poorest households pay as much as 10 times more for water as wealthy households.

• Water is a vital productive input for the smallholder farmers who account for more than half of the world’s population living on less than $1 a day.

• Mounting pressure to reallocate water from agriculture to industry threatens to increase rural poverty.

• Bringing water and sanitation into the mainstream of national and international strategies for achieving the Millennium Development Goals requires policies aimed at:

• Making access to water a human right and legislating for the progressive implementation of that right by ensuring that all people have access to at least 20 litres of clean water a day.

• Increasing public investment in extending the water network in urban areas and expanding provision in rural areas.

• Introducing “lifeline tariffs”, cross-subsidies and invest-ments in standpipes to ensure that nobody is denied access to water because of poverty, with a target ceiling of 3% for the share of household income spent on water.

• Regulating water utilities to improve efficiency, enhance equity and ensure accountability to the poor.

• Introducing public policies that combine sustainability with equity in the development of water resources for agriculture.

• Supporting the development and adoption of pro-poor irriga-tion technologies.

Goal 2 Achieve universal primary education

• Collecting water and carrying it over long distances keep millions of girls out of school, consigning them to a future of illiteracy and restricted choice.

• Water-related diseases such as diarrhoea and parasitic infections cost 443 million school days each year— equivalent to an entire school year for all seven-year-old children in Ethiopia—and diminish learning potential.

• Inadequate water and sanitation provision in schools in many countries is a threat to child health.

• The absence of adequate sanitation and water in schools is a major reason that girls drop out.

• Parasitic infection transmitted through water and poor sani-tation retards learning potential for more than 150 million children.

• Linking targets and strategies for achieving universal primary education to strategies for ensuring that every school has adequate water and sanitation provision, with separate facili-ties for girls.

• Making sanitation and hygiene parts of the school curriculum, equipping children with the knowledge they need to reduce health risks and enabling them to become agents of change in their communities.

• Establishing public health programmes in schools and communities that prevent and treat water-related infectious diseases.

Human De velopmenT RepoRT 2006 23


Goal 3 Promote gender equality and empower women

• Deprivation in water and sanitation perpetuates gender inequality and disempowers women.

• Women bear the brunt of responsibility for collecting water, often spending up to 4 hours a day walking, waiting in queues and carrying water. This is a major source of time poverty.

• The time women spend caring for children made ill by waterborne diseases diminishes their opportunity to engage in productive work.

• Inadequate sanitation is experienced by millions of women as a loss of dignity and source of insecurity.

• Women account for the bulk of food production in many countries but experience restricted rights to water.

• Putting gender equity in water and sanitation at the centre of national poverty reduction strategies.

• Enacting legislation that requires female representation on water committees and other bodies.

• Supporting sanitation campaigns that give women a greater voice in shaping public investment decisions and household spending.

• Reforming property rights and the rules governing irrigation and other water user associations to ensure that women enjoy equal rights.

Goal 4 Reduce child mortality

• Dirty water and poor sanitation account for the vast majority of the 1.8 million child deaths each year from diarrhoea—almost 5,000 every day—making it the second largest cause of child mortality.

• Access to clean water and sanitation can reduce the risk of a child dying by as much as 50%.

• Diarrhoea caused by unclean water is one of the world’s greatest killers, claiming the lives of five times as many children as HIV/AIDS.

• Clean water and sanitation are among the most powerful preventative measures for child mortality: achieving the Millennium Development Goal for water and sanitation at even the most basic level of provision would save more than 1 million lives in the next decade; universal provision would raise the number of lives saved to 2 million.

• Waterborne diseases reinforce deep and socially unjust disparities, with children in poor households facing a risk of death some three to four times greater than children in rich households.

• Treating child deaths from water and sanitation as a national emergency—and as a violation of basic human rights.

• Using international aid to strengthen basic healthcare provi-sion in preventing and treating diarrhoea.

• Establishing explicit linkages between targets for lowering child mortality and targets for expanding access to water and sanitation.

• Prioritizing the needs of the poorest households in public investment and service provision strategies for water and sanitation.

• Ensuring that Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers recognize the link between water and sanitation and child mortality.

• Publishing annual estimates of child deaths caused by water and sanitation problems.

Goal 5 Improve maternal health

• The provision of water and sanitation reduces the incidence of diseases and afflictions—such as anaemia, vitamin deficiency and trachoma—that undermine maternal health and contribute to maternal mortality.

• Treating water and sanitation provision as a key component in strategies for gender equality.

• Empowering women to shape decisions on water and sanita-tion at the household, local and national levels.

Goal 6 Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases

• Inadequate access to water and sanitation restricts op-portunities for hygiene and exposes people with HIV/AIDS to increased risks of infection.

• HIV-infected mothers require clean water to make formula milk.

• Achieving the Millennium Development Goal target for water and sanitation would reduce the costs to health systems of treating water-related infectious diseases by $1.7 billion, increasing the resources available for HIV/AIDS treatment.

• Poor sanitation and drainage contribute to malaria, which claims some 1.3 million lives a year, 90% of them children under the age of five.

• Integrating water and sanitation into national and global strategies for tackling malaria and improving living conditions of HIV/AIDS patients.

• Ensuring that households caring for people with HIV/AIDS have access to at least 50 litres of free water.

• Investing in the drainage and sanitation facilities that reduce the presence of flies and mosquitoes.

Eight reasons for the world to act on water and sanitation—links to the Millennium Development Goals (continued)

(continued on next page)

24 Human De velopmenT RepoRT 2006

Eight reasons for the world to act on water and sanitation—links to the Millennium Development Goals (continued)


Goal 7 Ensure environmental sustainability

Halve the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation

• The goal of halving the proportion of people without access to water and sanitation will be missed on current trends by 234 million people for water and 430 million people for sanitation.

• Sub-Saharan Africa will need to increase new connections for sanitation from 7 million a year for the past decade to 28 million a year by 2015.

• Slow progress in water and sanitation will hold back advances in other areas.

• Putting in place practical measures that translate Millennium Development Goal commitments into practical actions.

• Providing national and international political leadership to overcome the twin deficits in water and sanitation.

• Supplementing the Millennium Development Goal target with the target of halving water and sanitation coverage disparities between the richest and poorest 20%.

• Empowering independent regulators to hold service providers to account for delivering efficient and affordable services to the poor.

Reverse the loss of environmental resources

• The unsustainable exploitation of water resources repre-sents a growing threat to human development, generating an unsustainable ecological debt that will be transferred to future generations.

• The number of people living in water-stressed countries will increase from about 700 million today to more than 3 billion by 2025.

• Over 1.4 billion people currently live in river basins where the use of water exceeds minimum recharge levels, leading to the desiccation of rivers and depletion of groundwater.

• Water insecurity linked to climate change threatens to increase malnutrition by 75–125 million people by 2080, with staple food production in many Sub-Saharan African countries falling by more than 25%.

• Groundwater depletion poses a grave threat to agricultural systems, food security and livelihoods across Asia and the Middle East.

• Treating water as a precious natural resource, rather than an expendable commodity to be exploited without reference to environmental sustainability.

• Reforming national accounts to reflect the real economic losses associated with the depletion of water resources.

• Introducing integrated water resources management policies that constrain water use within the limits of environmental sustainability, factoring in the needs of the environment.

• Institutionalizing policies that create incentives for conserv-ing water and eliminating perverse subsidies that encourage unsustainable water-use patterns.

• Strengthening the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol to limit carbon emissions in line with stabilization targets of 450 parts per million, bolstering clean technology transfer mecha-nisms and bringing all countries under a stronger multilateral framework for emission reductions in 2012.

• Developing national adaptation strategies for dealing with the impact of climate change—and increasing aid for adaptation.

Goal 8 Develop a global partnership for development

• There is no effective global partnership for water and sanita-tion, and successive high-level conferences have failed to create the momentum needed to push water and sanitation in the international agenda.

• Many national governments are failing to put in place the policies and financing needed to accelerate progress.

• Water and sanitation is weakly integrated into Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers.

• Many countries with high child death rates caused by diar-rhoea are spending less than 0.5% of GDP on water and sanitation, a fraction of what they are allocating to military budgets.

• Rich countries have failed to prioritize water and sanitation in international aid partnerships, and spending on develop-ment assistance for the sector has been falling in real terms, now representing only 4% of total aid flows.

• International aid to agriculture has fallen by a third since the early 1990s, from 12% to 3.5% of total aid.

• Putting in place a global plan of action to galvanize political action, placing water and sanitation on to the agenda of the Group of Eight, mobilizing resources and supporting nationally owned planning processes.

• Developing nationally owned plans that link the Millennium Development Goal target for water and sanitation to clear medium-term financing provisions and to practical policies for overcoming inequality.

• Empowering local governments and local communities through decentralization, capacity development and adequate financing, with at least 1% of GDP allocated to water and sanitation through public spending.

• Increasing aid for water by $3.6–$4 billion annually by 2010, with an additional $2 billion allocated to Sub-Saharan Africa.

• Increasing aid for agriculture from $3 billion to $10 billion an-nually by 2010, with a strengthened focus on water security.

About UNDPThe United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is the UN’s global development network, advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. We are on the ground in 166 countries, working with governments and people on their own solutions to global and national development challenges. As they develop local capacity, they draw on the people of UNDP and our wide range of partners that can bring about results.

World leaders have pledged to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015, including the overarching goal of cutting extreme poverty in half. UNDP, using its worldwide network, is coordinating global and national efforts to reach these Goals.

On the Ground in Developing CountriesOur focus is helping countries build and share solutions to the challenges of:

• Democratic Governance: More countries than ever before are working to build democratic governance. Their challenge is to develop institutions and processes that are more responsive to the needs of ordinary citizens, including the poor, and that promote development. UNDP helps countries strengthen electoral and legislative systems, improve access to justice and public administration, and develop a greater capacity to deliver basic services to those most in need. Through its programmes, UNDP brings people together within nations and around the world, fostering partnerships and sharing ways to promote participation, accountability and effectiveness at all levels.

• Poverty Reduction: Developing countries are working to create their own national pov-erty eradication strategies based on local needs and priorities. UNDP advocates for these nationally-owned solutions and helps ensure their effectiveness. We sponsor innovative pilot projects; connect countries to global best practices and resources; promote the role of women in development; and bring governments, civil society and outside funders together to coordinate their efforts.

• Crisis Prevention and Recovery: Many countries are increasingly vulnerable to violent confl icts or natural disasters that can erase decades of development and further en-trench poverty and inequality. Through its global network, UNDP seeks out and shares innovative approaches to crisis prevention, early warning and confl ict resolution as it has done recently in Afghanistan, Sierra Leone and Timor-Leste. And because UNDP is on the ground in almost every developing country, wherever the next crisis occurs, we will be there to help bridge the gap between emergency relief and long-term development.

• Energy and Environment: The poor are disproportionately affected by environmental degradation and lack of access to clean, affordable energy services. Energy and environ-mental issues are also global, as climate change, loss of biodiversity and ozone layer depletion cannot be addressed by countries acting alone. UNDP, through programmes such as the Equator Initiative, and the Global Environment Facility—a partnership with the UN Environment Programme and the World Bank—helps countries strengthen their capacity to address these challenges at the global, national and community levels, seeking out and sharing best practices, providing innovative policy advice and linking partners through pilot projects.

• HIV/AIDS: To prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS and reduce its impact, developing countries need to mobilize all levels of government and civil society. As a trusted development partner, UNDP advocates for placing HIV/AIDS at the centre of national planning and budgets; helps build national capacity to manage initiatives that include people and in-stitutions not usually involved with public health; and promotes decentralized responses that support community level action. Because HIV/AIDS is a worldwide problem, UNDP supports these national efforts by offering knowledge, resources and best practices from around the world.

In each of these fi ve areas, UNDP advocates for the protection of human rightsIn each of these fi ve areas, UNDP advocates for the protection of human rightsIn each of these fi ve areas, UNDP advocates for the protection of and especially the empowerment of women. Through our global network, we seek out and share ways to promote gender equality as an essential dimension of ensuring political participation and accountability; economic empowerment and effective development planning; crisis prevention and confl ict resolution; access to clean water, sanitation and energy services; and society-wide mobilization against HIV/AIDS.

Within the UN SystemUNDP is at the centre of the UN’s efforts to reduce global poverty. At the global level, UNDP chairs the UN Development Group, which includes the UN’s key players in international development. At the country level, the UNDP Resident Representa-tive serves as Resident Coordinator of all UN development activities. Working to ensure the strategic integration of develop-ment efforts within the UN and among governments, donors and civil society is one of UNDP’s most important roles. In a world of limited resources and capacities, UNDP helps to ensure the most effective use of UN and international aid resources.

Around the WorldUNDP has a unique voice in international development. The annual Human Development Report, commissioned by UNDP, Human Development Report, commissioned by UNDP, Human Development Reportfocuses the global debate on key development issues, providing new measurement tools, innovative analysis and often controversial policy proposals. It is guided by the belief that development is ultimately a process of enlarging people’s choices, not just raising national incomes. The independent team of experts who write the Report draw on a worldwide network of leaders from academia, government and civil society who contribute data, ideas, and best practices. Developing countries and their international partners use the Report to gauge results and shape new policies.

The global Report’s analytical framework and inclusive approach carry over into regional, national and local human development reports. The Arab Human Development Report, prepared by Arab scholars and intellectuals, has provided an hon-Arab Human Development Report, prepared by Arab scholars and intellectuals, has provided an hon-Arab Human Development Reportest, balanced—and at times—harsh view of the obstacles to development in the Arab world. And UNDP has also sponsored reports on the limitations of democracy in Latin America, the plight of the Roma in Europe and the importance of promoting entrepreneurship in developing countries. At the country level, more than 500 National Human Development Reports have been published in 143 countries. These Reports are created by national experts and intellectuals and in many cases, their research and advocacy has spurred policy debates that have inspired leaders in countries to build their own devel-opment solutions. UNDP also sponsors the Millennium Project which, with contributions from more than 250 development experts, produced far-reaching recommendations for eliminating poverty and achieving the MDGs.

E-1-1

Strictly embargoed until 15:00 Cape Town (13:00 GMT, 08:00 New York) 9 November 2006

World water and sanitation crisis urgently needs a Global Action Plan The 2006 Human Development Report calls for 20 litres of clean water a day for all as a human right Cape Town, 9 November 2006—A Global Action Plan under G8 leadership is urgently needed to resolve a growing water and sanitation crisis that causes nearly two million child deaths every year, says the 2006 Human Development Report, released here today. Across much of the developing world, unclean water is an immeasurably greater threat to human security than violent conflict, according to the Report, entitled Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis. Each year, the authors report, 1.8 million children die from diarrhoea that could be prevented with access to clean water and a toilet; 443 million school days are lost to water-related illnesses; and almost 50 percent of all people in developing countries are suffering at any given time from a health problem caused by a lack of water and sanitation. To add to these human costs, the crisis in water and sanitation holds back economic growth, with sub-Saharan Africa losing five percent of GDP annually—far more than the region receives in aid. Yet unlike wars and natural disasters, this global crisis does not galvanise concerted international action, says the 2006 Human Development Report (HDR). “Like hunger, it is a silent emergency experienced by the poor and tolerated by those with the resources, the technology and the political power to end it,” says the Report. With less than a decade left to reach the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015, this needs to change, stress the authors. G8 countries must take action “When it comes to water and sanitation, the world suffers from a surplus of conference activity and a deficit of credible action. The diversity of international actors has militated against the development of strong international champions for water and sanitation,” says Kevin Watkins, lead author of the 2006 Human Development Report. “National governments need to draw up credible plans and strategies for tackling the crisis in water and sanitation. But we also need a Global Action Plan—with active buy-in from the G8 countries—to focus fragmented international efforts to mobilize resources and galvanize political action by putting water and sanitation front and centre on the development agenda,” he says. The Action Plan would act as a ‘virtual mechanism,’ says the Report, which cites the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria—run by a small secretariat with minimal bureaucracy—as a useful reference point. “I fully support the call for a Global Action Plan to tackle the growing water and sanitation crisis,” said UNDP Administrator Kemal Derviş. “As the 2006 Human Development Report highlights, each one of the eight Millennium Development Goals is inextricably tied to the next, so if we fail on the water and sanitation goal, hope of reaching the other seven rapidly fades.

E-1-2

“Either we take concerted action now to bring clean water and sanitation to the world’s poor, or we consign millions of people to lives of avoidable poverty, poor health and diminished opportunities, and perpetuate deep inequalities within and between countries. And we have a collective responsibility to succeed,” he said. Governments should spend 1% GDP on water and sanitation The HDR 2006 recommends that in addition to creating a Global Action Plan, the following three foundations are crucial for success:

1. Make water a human right—and mean it: “Everyone should have at least 20 litres of clean water per day and the poor should get it for free,” says the Report: While a person in the UK or USA sends 50 litres down the drain each day by simply flushing their toilet, many poor people survive on less than five litres of contaminated water per day, according to HDR research. The Report advocates for all governments to go beyond vague constitutional principles in enabling legislation to secure the human right to a secure, accessible and affordable supply of water. At a minimum, this implies a target of at least 20 litres of clean water a day for every citizen—and at no cost for those too poor to pay, stress the authors.

2. Draw up national strategies for water and sanitation: Governments should aim to spend a minimum of one percent GDP on water and sanitation, and enhance equity, the authors urge: Water and sanitation suffer from chronic under-funding. Public spending is typically less than 0.5 percent of GDP. Research for the 2006 HDR shows that this figure is dwarfed by military spending: In Ethiopia, for example, the military budget is 10 times the water and sanitation budget—in Pakistan, 47 times. The Report’s authors urge all governments to prepare national plans for accelerating progress in water and sanitation, with ambitious targets backed with financing to the tune of at least one percent of GDP, and clear strategies for overcoming inequalities.

3. Increased international aid: The Report calls for an extra US$3.4 billion to $4 billion annually: Development assistance has fallen in real terms over the past decade, but to bring the MDG on water and sanitation into reach, aid flows will have to double, says the Report.

It states that progress in water and sanitation requires large upfront investments with a very long payback period, so innovative financing strategies like the International Finance Facility are essential. This would be money well-spent, according to the authors, who estimate the economic return in saved time, increased productivity and reduced health costs at $8 for each $1 invested in achieving the water and sanitation target.

What could progress mean for the poor? The 2006 HDR estimates the total additional cost of achieving the MDG on access to water and sanitation—to be sourced domestically and internationally—at about $10 billion a year. “The $10 billion price tag for the MDG seems a large sum—but it has to be put in context. It represents less than five days’ worth of global military spending and less than half what rich countries spend each year on mineral water,” says the Report. The human-development gains would be immense, stress the authors. The Report shows that closing the gap between current trends and the MDG target on water and sanitation would save more than one million children’s lives over the next decade and bring total economic benefits of about $38 billion annually. The benefits for Sub-Saharan Africa—about $15 billion—would represent 60 percent of its 2003 aid flows. As it now stands, the world is on schedule to reach the MDG on access to water—largely because of strong progress in China and India—but only two regions, East Asia and Latin America, are on track for sanitation. Moreover, this global picture masks real problems: On current trends sub-Saharan Africa will reach the water target in 2040 and the sanitation target in 2076. For sanitation South Asia is four years off track, and for water the Arab States are 27 years off track.

E-1-3

Measured on a country-by-country basis, this means that 234 million people will miss the water target, with 55 countries off track, and 430 million people will not reach the sanitation target, with 74 countries off track, says the Report. “Can the world afford to meet the costs of accelerated progress towards water and sanitation provision?” asks lead author Watkins. “The more appropriate question is: Can the world afford not to make the investments?” Cost of the crisis “Delivering clean water, removing waste water, and providing sanitation are three of the most basic foundations for human progress,” says the 2006 HDR. But 1.1 billion people do not have access to water, and 2.6 billion do not have access to sanitation. The Report adds: “ ‘Not having access to clean water’ is a euphemism for profound deprivation. It means that people walk more than one kilometre to the nearest source of clean water for drinking, that they collect water from drains, ditches or streams that might be infected with pathogens and bacteria that can cause severe illness and death.” ‘No access to sanitation’ means that in slums like Kibera, outside the Kenyan capital of Nairobi, people defecate in plastic bags—known colloquially as ‘flying toilets’—and throw them into open sewers in the street because they have no other option. And the poorer you are, the more you pay for clean water, according to HDR research: The poorest households of El Salvador, Jamaica and Nicaragua spend on average over 10 percent of their income on water. In the United Kingdom, spending three percent of family income on water is considered the hardship threshold. Indeed, HDR 2006 highlights huge disparities in the prices that people pay for water. People living in urban slums typically pay 5-10 times more per litre than people living in high-income areas. And people living in the poorest parts of cities like Accra and Manila pay more than the residents of London, New York and Paris. One-third of all people without access to water fall below the $1-a-day absolute poverty threshold. Another third live on no more than $2 a day. In sanitation, the poorest two-fifths of households in the world account for more than half the global deficit, according to the 2006 HDR. These figures are not evidence of causation—people might lack water and sanitation because they are poor, or they might be poor because they lack water and sanitation—but the numbers do signal a strong two-way relationship between income poverty and deprivation in access to water, the authors stress. And the public-versus-private debate on water is not helping the poor, argues the 2006 HDR. “The debate over the relative merits of public and private sector performance has been a distraction from the inadequate performance of both public and private water providers in overcoming the global water deficit,” says the Report. Beyond the household The poor need ‘water for life’—for drinking, cooking and washing—as well as water to grow food and earn a living, says the Report. Yet poor farmers face a potentially catastrophic water crisis from the combination of climate change and competition for scarce water resources, stress the authors. The great majority of the world’s malnourished people—estimated now at 830 million—are small farmers, herders, and farm labourers. Climate change threatens to intensify their water insecurity on an unparalleled scale, with parts of sub-Saharan Africa facing crop losses of up to 25 percent. At the same time, competition over water to produce food is escalating at an alarming rate in developing countries, with political and economic power, not concern for poverty, acting as the driving force, says the Report. Shoring up the rights of the rural poor, increasing their access to irrigation and new technology and helping them adapt to inevitable climate change will be imperative to ward off disaster, contend the authors.

E-1-4

Faced with these challenges, need for increasing cooperation across national borders to ensure water security for the poor is more tangible than ever, as by 2025, over three billion people could be living in countries under water stress, says the Report. That said, the 2006 HDR challenges predictions that increasing competition for water will inevitably provoke armed conflicts. The Report finds, in fact, that cross-border cooperation over water resources is already far more pervasive and successful than is commonly presumed. India and Pakistan, for example, despite two cross-border wars and constant geopolitical tension, have for half a century jointly managed shared watersheds through the Permanent Indus Water Commission. “Managing shared water can be a force for peace or for conflict, but it is politics that will decide which course is chosen,” says Watkins. The 2006 HDR stresses that the right political choices on water and sanitation could in fact hold the key to solving the global crisis, as history demonstrates.

History shows the crisis can be fixed Just over 100 years ago, infant mortality rates in Washington, DC, were twice what they are today in sub-Saharan Africa, write the authors. Water-borne diseases like diarrhoea, dysentery and typhoid fever accounted for 1 in 10 deaths in US cities in the late 19th century, with children the primary victims. The Report recounts that in the UK and elsewhere, people were getting wealthier through the industrial revolution, but not healthier. The poor moved from rural to urban areas to benefit from the boom while overwhelmed cities turned into lethal open-air sewers, and epidemics of typhoid and cholera regularly swept through cities like New Orleans and New York. In the hot summer of 1858, the UK Parliament was forced to temporarily close during what became known as ‘The Great Stink,’ caused by sewerage flowing into the river Thames. For the rich, it was a nuisance. For the poor, who got their drinking water from the river, it was a killer. By the end of the 19th century, governments recognized that the diseases associated with water and sanitation could not be contained in the cities’ poor tenements; it was in the greater public’s interest to take action. In the UK, US and elsewhere, massive investments were made in effective sewerage systems and the purification of water supplies to great effect. No other period in US history, for example, has witnessed such rapid declines in mortality rates. This change reflected a rare instance in history where a major social ill was successfully resolved. And it could happen again, says the 2006 HDR: “Resolving the water and sanitation crisis could be the next great leap forward for mankind,” says Watkins. “We urgently need history to repeat itself—this time in developing countries.”

E-1-5

* * * * BROADCAST FOOTAGE ON THE 2006 HDR IS AVAILABLE under embargo from Wednesday, 1 November at http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/media. For broadcast enquiries, please contact Boaz Paldi, [email protected], +1 917 213 7520. ABOUT THIS REPORT: The Human Development Report continues to frame debates on some of the most pressing challenges facing humanity. It is an independent report commissioned by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Kevin Watkins is the Lead Author of the 2006 report, which includes special contributions from U.K. Chancellor Gordon Brown, Nigeria’s Finance Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, President Lula of Brazil, Former U.S. President Carter, and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. The Report is translated into more than a dozen languages and launched in more than 100 countries annually. Further information can be found at http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006. The 2006 Human Development Report is published in English by Palgrave Macmillan. ABOUT UNDP: UNDP is the UN's global network to help people meet their development needs and build a better life. We are on the ground in 166 countries, working as a trusted partner with governments, civil society and the private sector to help them build their own solutions to global and national development challenges. Further information can be found at www.undp.org

E-2-1


Why children die for lack of a toilet World sanitation crisis causes millions of avoidable deaths, and contamination from human waste is largely to blame, says UNDP’s Human Development Report

Cape Town, 9 November 2006—Simply installing a flush toilet in the home increases by

almost 60 percent a Peruvian child’s chances of surviving to her first birthday, according

to data in the 2006 Human Development Report documenting the often-fatal consequences

of inadequate sanitation in developing countries.

The Report shows that the efficacy of human-waste disposal is one of the strongest

determinants of child survival around the world. Improving sanitation in the home—

advancing from open defecation to using a pit latrine to installing a flush toilet—

reduces overall child mortality by about a third, say the authors of the Report, entitled

Beyond scarcity: power, poverty and the global water crisis.

More than 2.6 billion people still lack access to proper sanitation, and 1.1 billion people

have no regular access to clean water. As a result, 1.8 million children die from diarrhoea

each year, making the disease the second-largest cause of global child mortality, says

the Report.

The toilet may seem an unlikely catalyst for human development, but the Report provides

abundant and powerful evidence to shows how it benefits people’s well-being. Research

shows that in Peru, access to a flush toilet reduces the risk of infant death by 59 percent,

compared with an infant in a household without adequate sanitation. In Egypt, similarly,

data show the risk of infant death plummeting by 57 percent in households with toilets.

“ ‘No access to sanitation’ is a polite way of saying that people draw water for drinking,

cooking and washing from rivers, lakes, ditches and drains fouled with human and animal

excrement,” said Kevin Watkins, head of UNDP’s Human Development Report Office and

the report’s principal author. “It means that in slums like Kibera, outside Nairobi, people

defecate in plastic bags and throw them into the street because they have no other option.”

The crisis in water and sanitation is—above all—a crisis for the poor. More than 660

million people without sanitation live on US$2 or less a day, and more than 385 million

live on $1 or less a day. That said, coverage rates for sanitation are far lower than those for

water even in higher-income groups: A quarter of the richest 20 percent of people in

developing countries have no access to improved sanitation, says the Report.

The Report lays out the following steps as prerequisites for progress:

• Better political leadership: Leaders need to send a clear signal that sanitation

is part of their national development policies.

• Ensuring public participation is part of national planning.

• Investing in demand-led approaches through which service providers respond

to the needs of communities, with women having a voice in shaping priorities.

• Through innovative financial arrangements or subsidies, extending financial support

to the poorest households to ensure that sanitation is an affordable option.

• Addressing inequality by identifying who has access and who does not. This would

include supplementing the current MDG sanitation target with explicit targets for

reducing inequalities based on gender, wealth and location.

E-2-2

• Developing a Global Action Plan on water and sanitation to mobilize finance, support developing-country

governments’ use of local capital markets, and enhance capacity to act, while also acting as a focal point for public

advocacy and political efforts.

Access to basic sanitation is a crucial human-development goal in its own right; for millions of people, the absence

of a safe, private and convenient toilet facility is a daily source of indignity, as well as a threat to well-being. But it

is also a bridge to far-broader human development. The lack of basic sanitation drags down the benefits of access to

clean water, and the health, gender and other inequalities caused by a sanitation deficit systematically undermine

progress in education and wealth creation, and foster poverty.

Unfit for discussion

Instead of being recognized as the international emergency it is, sanitation is entirely absent from political campaigns

and public debate. The realities of open defecation are relegated to backroom politics, and as a result, progress has

been glacial, says the Report. The authors point to stigma as one of the greatest obstacles.

The parallels between the stigma of sanitation issues and that of AIDS are both instructive and troubling. Until fairly

recently, the Report points out, the cultural and social taboos surrounding HIV and AIDS impeded development of

effective national and international responses, at enormous human cost.

That taboo has been weakening, partly because of the scale of the HIV/AIDS

scourge—but also because the condition afflicts all members of society,

without regard for social or economic status. Because the crisis in sanitation

overwhelmingly targets the poor, its taboo remains stubbornly intact.

Women’s burden

Gender inequality is a second major impediment to progress. Young girls,

particularly after puberty, are less likely to attend classes if schools do not

have suitable hygiene facilities, and the authors estimate that about half the

girls in Sub-Saharan Africa who drop out of school do so because of poor

water and sanitation facilities.

Studies from Cambodia, Indonesia and Vietnam show that women consistently

rank having a toilet high on their list of priorities for a life of dignity and good

health, but their voices are seldom heard. Empowering women may be the most

effective way to increase demand for sanitation, says the Report.

From the ground up

The Report offers concrete examples of how grassroots action combined

with government leadership can improve sanitation for the poor. In the Orangi

slum of Pakistan’s capital, Karachi, near-universal participation in a grassroots

sanitation project has helped bring about a drop in infant mortality from

130 deaths per 1,000 live births in the early 1980s to fewer than 40 deaths

per 1,000 live births today.

Ten years ago, Bangladesh had one of the lowest levels in the world of

access to proper sanitation in its rural areas. Despite being one of the world’s

poorest countries, it is now on target to achieve nationwide sanitation coverage

by 2010, thanks to a ‘total sanitation campaign’ promoted by NGOs and

local authorities. The campaign appeals to three drivers of change: disgust,

self-interest and a sense of individual responsibility for community welfare.

The same approach is now being employed in Cambodia, China, India

and Zambia.

E-2-3

The report stresses, however, that while community-led initiatives are critical, they are not a substitute for government

action.

What needs to happen?

The biggest barrier in sanitation, the authors conclude, is the unwillingness of national and international political

leaders to put the growing crisis on the international development agenda. Tackling the problem requires greater

awareness of the real costs—not just to poor people, but to societies as a whole—of ‘no access to sanitation,’

the Report says, arguing for wider recognition that sanitation is a basic human right.

* * * *

BROADCAST FOOTAGE ON THE 2006 HDR IS AVAILABLE under embargo from Wednesday,

1 November at http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/media. For broadcast enquiries, please contact Boaz Paldi,

[email protected], +1 917 213 7520.

ABOUT THIS REPORT: The Human Development Report continues to frame debates on some of the most

pressing challenges facing humanity. It is an independent report commissioned by the United Nations Development

Programme (UNDP). Kevin Watkins is the Lead Author of the 2006 report, which includes special contributions

from UK Chancellor Gordon Brown, Nigeria’s former Finance Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, President Lula of

Brazil, Former US President Jimmy Carter, and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. The Report is translated into more

than a dozen languages and launched in more than 100 countries annually. Further information can be found at

http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006. The 2006 Human Development Report is published in English by Palgrave Macmillan.

ABOUT UNDP: UNDP is the UN's global network to help people meet their development needs and build a better

life. We are on the ground in 166 countries, working as a trusted partner with governments, civil society and the

private sector to help them build their own solutions to global and national development challenges. Further

information can be found at www.undp.org

E-3-1


Cruel irony: water costs the most

for those who can least afford it Longstanding public-versus-private debate hinders real progress, says 2006 Human Development Report

Cape Town, 9 November 2006—Across the world, the poor are forced to pay much more

for clean water than their affluent neighbours, says the 2006 Human Development Report,

released today.

The Report, entitled Beyond scarcity: Power, politics and the global water crisis, notes

that in the slums of Nairobi the poor pay five to 10 times more per litre of water than

wealthy people living in the same city. The poorest households of El Salvador, Nicaragua

and Jamaica spend on average over 10 percent of their income on water; in the United

Kingdom, by contrast, spending more than three percent of family income on water is

considered an economic hardship.

And the longstanding public-versus-private debate on water will not bring prices down,

stresses the 2006 HDR. In recent years, public debate on water-delivery policy in

developing countries has been dominated by a polarizing discussion on privatization

versus public ownership. But the authors argue that this is a false choice, diverting

attention from the ultimate goal of finding viable ways of getting potable water to those

who can least afford to pay.

“The debate over the relative merits of public and private-sector performance has been

a distraction from the inadequate performance of both public and private water providers

in overcoming the global water deficit,” says the Report. A new, more strategic approach

that puts the poor at the centre of the solution is essential to reach the Millennium

Development Goals by 2015, stress the authors.

As a starting point, the Report advocates for all governments to go beyond vague

constitutional principles in enabling legislation to ensure the human right to a secure,

accessible and affordable supply of water. At a minimum, this implies a target of at

least 20 litres of clean water a day for every citizen—and at no cost for those too poor

to pay, the authors emphasize.

The way forward

The 2006 HDR lays out a number of recommendations on how to make this a reality:

• Put water at the centre of poverty-reduction strategies and budget planning:

A bold, coherent national water plan grounded in strategies for reducing poverty

and extreme inequality is a first step, stress the authors, but this needs to be backed

with predictable finance.

• Extend ‘lifeline tariffs’: The 2006 HDR notes that lifeline tariffs would allow poor

households to access a minimum amount of water for a very low price or no charge,

with usage fees rising thereafter. South Africa has already legislated that every person

should have a minimum of 25 litres of clean water each day. However, tariffs alone

will not help where informal settlements are not connected to the utility or where

households do not have meters installed, says the Report.

E-3-2

• Expand ‘pro-poor’ investment: Water is

underfinanced, says the Report. The biggest

financing gaps are in rural areas and in informal

urban settlements. Closing these gaps requires

increased financing and a reorientation of public

spending to rural communities, through the

provision of wells and boreholes, and to urban

slum areas, through the provision of standpipes.

• Set clear goals—and hold providers to account: The authors stress that contract arrangements under public-

private management agreements should set clear goals for expanding access for poor households living in slums.

Non-performance should result in financial penalties. The same rules should apply to public providers, with

nonperformance penalized through incentive systems, says the Report.

• Develop and expand the regulatory framework: The public-versus-private debate has diverted attention from the

pressing issue of public utility reform, stress the authors. “The water sector has many of the characteristics of a

natural monopoly and in the absence of a strong regulatory capacity to protect the public interest through the rules

on pricing and investment, there are dangers of monopolistic abuse,” says the Report. It stresses that creating an

independent regulator to oversee water providers—including the intermediaries that serve the poor—is vital for

ensuring that water provision reflects the public interest.

• Rethink and redesign water tariffs and subsidies: Subsidies can play a critical role in delivering affordable

water to the poor, says the Report, but too often, they instead deliver windfalls to the non-poor, while impoverished

households using public taps face the highest prices. Targeted subsidies depend on the capacity of the government

to identify poor households. Where done properly, as in Chile, this can be a route to efficient water delivery by

private utilities and high levels of equity in water access. Using cross-subsidies—a combination of pricing and

access policies, including targeted subsidies—to support standpipe users where coverage rates are low would be

a step towards improved equality.

• Prioritize the rural sector: Rural water supply poses special challenges. Building on successful demand-

responsive approaches, governments need to make service providers more responsive and accountable to the

communities that they serve. Decentralization of water governance can play an important role, provided that

decentralized bodies have the technical and financial capacity to deliver services, says the Report.

What does water cost?

No one can live without water. But for 1.1 billion people around the world, water sources can be unreliable, unsafe

or beyond their purchasing power. The Report notes: “ ‘Not having access to clean water’ is a euphemism for

profound deprivation. It means that people walk more than one kilometre to the nearest source of clean water for

drinking, that they collect water from drains, ditches or streams that might be infected with pathogens and bacteria

that can cause severe illness and death.”

And the poorer you are, the more you pay for clean water, says the Report. For those who must get water from

tankers, access to water costs far more per litre than it does for their richer compatriots, or for people in the cities

of the developed world.

Why do the poor pay more—and get less water?

While the rich usually get water from a single supplier, the poor have to reckon with a bewildering array of service

providers, such as public standpipes, vendors, truckers, and water carriers. Some of the water vendors access water

from the municipal source and then re-sell it at a premium to poor slum dwellers who do not have access to piped

water. As a result, water delivered through a vendor is often 10 to 20 times more costly than water provided by the

public utility.

E-3-3

Inequality is one driver of the crisis: ‘Water lords’ now dominate the water market in the Indian state of Gujarat, for

example, where falling water tables are compromising the lives of hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people. Large

landowners have constructed deep wells, depriving neighbouring villages of water, only to sell it back at a high price

to those whose wells they have emptied.

Elsewhere, tariff structures can be a disincentive to conserve water and can, in fact, make it cheaper for the affluent

or rich to consume even more water. In places like Dhaka, Bangladesh, where a flat tariff is charged for water usage,

those with private water connections are in effect subsidized to the detriment of the poor: A tariff rate that increased

with the level of water consumed would generate resources that could then increase coverage of the water network

and improve the infrastructure of the water utility.

One of the deepest disparities in water and sanitation is between urban and rural areas, partially because incomes tend

to be lower in rural areas, but also because delivering services is more difficult and often more costly per capita for

dispersed rural populations than for urban populations, says the 2006 HDR. Political factors also come into play, with

people in rural areas—especially marginal areas—typically having a far weaker voice than their urban counterparts.

The public-versus-private debate

In countries with high levels of poverty among unserved populations,

public finance is necessary to extend access, regardless of whether

the provider is public or private, stress the authors.

Experiences in Argentina, Bolivia, the Philippines and the United States

show that the private sector does not offer a ‘magic bullet’ solution to

providing equitable water for all. Their experiences in fact indicate that

greater caution, regulation and commitment to equity in public-private

partnerships are necessary.

Public providers dominate water service, accounting for more than

90 percent of the water delivered through networks in developing

countries. Many publicly owned utilities are failing the poor, but

some, like Porto Alegre in Brazil, have succeeded in making water

affordable and accessible to all.

What is currently spent on water?

Water and sanitation suffer from chronic under-funding. Public spending is typically less than 0.5 percent of GDP.

2006 HDR research shows that this figure is dwarfed by military spending: In Ethiopia, for example, the military

budget is 10 times the water and sanitation budget—in Pakistan, 47 times.

The Reports’ authors urge all governments to prepare national plans for accelerating progress in water and sanitation

with ambitious target backed with financing to the tune of at least one percent of GDP and clear strategies for

overcoming inequalities.

Water and sanitation is not a donor-country priority, either, says the Report, with only five percent of Overseas

Development Assistance spent on this sector. The authors say a doubling of aid flows—an extra US$3.4 billion to

$4 billion annually—is necessary to have any chance of reaching the MDG on water and sanitation.

Progress in water and sanitation requires large upfront investments with a very long payback period, says the

2006 HDR, so innovative strategies like the International Finance Facility are essential. This would be money

well spent, according to the authors, who estimate the economic return in saved time, increased productivity and

reduced health costs at $8 for each $1 invested in achieving the water and sanitation target.

E-3-4

* * * *















E-4-1


Poor farmers face double water crisis:

climate change and competition Stronger rights, better irrigation and adaptation to global warming can avert catastrophe—if they arrive in time, says 2006 Human Development Report

Cape Town, 9 November 2006—Poor farmers face a potentially catastrophic water

crisis from the combination of climate change and competition for scarce water resources,

says the 2006 Human Development Report, released today.

The Report, entitled Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the global water crisis,

recommends immediate steps needed to avert a serious crisis: shoring up the rights of

the rural poor, increasing their access to irrigation and new technology and helping them

adapt to inevitable climate change.

“The biggest challenge ahead is how to manage water resources faced with competition

and climate change to meet rising food needs while protecting the access of poor and

vulnerable people,” said 2006 HDR lead author Kevin Watkins.

Intensifying competition for water is now one of the gravest threats to sustained human

development. Rising industrial demand, urbanization, population growth and pollution

are placing unprecedented stress on water systems—and on agriculture. As competition

intensifies, social conflict over water is likely to increase. The danger is that those with

the weakest rights—small farmers and women producers in particular—will lose out.

The great majority of the world’s malnourished people—estimated now at 830 million —

are small farmers, herders, and farm labourers. The regions where the world’s hungry are

now concentrated will have to absorb the bulk of the planet’s additional population over

the next decades, estimated at 2.4 billion by 2050. And as most of them will be dependent

on rainfed agriculture, the number of those at risk will continue to rise.

Climate change threatens to intensify water insecurity on an unparalleled scale. Even with

an agreement to mitigate carbon emissions through international cooperation, dangerous

climate change is now almost inevitable, and the most severe consequences will be

experienced by countries and people who bear no responsibility for the problem. Parts of

sub-Saharan Africa are facing crop losses of up to 25 percent from climate-change-

induced weather patterns. Meanwhile, accelerated glacial melt and reduced rainfall

threaten major food systems in South Asia.

The way forward

The Report recommends three primary courses of action to address the crisis threatening

poor farmers around the globe:

• Securing farmers’ rights: When water is in short supply, the powerful get it and the

weak don’t, says the 2006 HDR. Secure rights to water give poor people opportunities

to escape poverty, while the absence of those rights renders them unable to compete on

any level. Women are doubly disadvantaged, suffering from a lack of formal rights to

land and a lack of informal rights inside and outside the home. The Report states that

to maintain human progress, governments must recognize, extend and protect the water

rights of the rural poor.

E-4-2

• Irrigation and technology: Farmers with access to irrigation are less likely to be

among the poorest, stress the authors. But new sources of water for irrigation are

increasingly expensive and ecologically damaging, so the danger is that those with

no rights will get no access. And marginal farmers’ lack of formal land titles can

easily exclude them from irrigation schemes The Report therefore recommends

putting a price on irrigation use—a price directly linked to people’s ability to pay.

Efficient and fair cost-recovery systems linked to the benefits gained from irrigation

would help to rationalize the use of water and to pay for maintenance of irrigation

infrastructure, it says.

• Adaptation: Climate change is no longer a distant worry—it is happening, says

the 2006 HDR, and the poor need more and better assistance if they are to adapt to

it. International aid for adaptation ought to be a cornerstone of multilateral action

on climate change, yet aid transfers have been woefully inadequate, says the Report.

The Adaptation Fund attached to the Kyoto Protocol will mobilize only about

US$20 million by 2012 on current projections, while the Global Environmental

Facility—the principal multilateral mechanism for adaptation—has allocated

$50 million to support adaptation activities between 2005 and 2007.

Beyond the multilateral framework, developing countries as a group have seen aid to agriculture fall from 12 percent

to 3.5 percent of total aid since the early 1990s. Reversing these trends will be critical to successful adaptation.

The Report says tripling aid to agriculture—from $3 billion annually to $10 billion by 2010--should be a minimum

requirement.

Climate change

Efforts thus far to help the poor to adapt to climate change have been ‘spectacularly inadequate,’ says the Report.

As dry areas get drier, wet areas get wetter and extreme weather becomes more common, the poor—who are usually

most exposed to the elements and most directly dependent on the natural world for resources—will become more

vulnerable to hunger, poverty and environmental degradation. Inequality will intensify.

Agriculture will be the hardest hit. In some regions, changing rainfall patterns and declining water availability will

reduce yields by a quarter or more by 2050. Global malnutrition could increase by 15 to 26 percent, says the Report,

with 75 to 125 million more people facing malnourishment by 2080.

But suffering for lack of water isn’t just a problem for future

generations. Today in northeast Kenya, three million people risk

starvation from drought. Entire pastoral communities have seen

their herds and assets depleted, leaving them increasingly vulnerable

to all future risks. Violent clashes between farmers and pastoralists

over water have become increasingly common, while Kenya’s GDP

fell 16 percent between 1998 and 2000 due to drought. The full

economic costs are probably much greater since these figures fail to

count the effects of malnutrition, reduced investment in agriculture

and a loss of investment in industry, stress the authors.

Competition

As climate change disproportionately hurts the rural poor who

depend on agriculture but lack established rights, economic

empowerment and a political voice, increasing competition for

water has the potential to push these people ever closer to disaster,

says the Report. More and more, farmers are losing out to the

growing thirst of cities and industries. Within agriculture, larger

E-4-3

commercial producers are siphoning off the lifeline water supplies of poorer farmers, who then can neither produce a

secure food supply for themselves nor begin to compete with these commercial rivals, let alone the heavily subsidized

agricultural might of the developed world.

Rapid economic growth has put a serious strain on China’s water resources, for example,

especially in the country’s north. With only eight percent of the country’s water

resources, the Huai, Hai and Huang (Yellow) River Basins (3-H river basins) supply

water to almost half of the country’s population and 40 percent of its agricultural land,

so they are already under great strain, says the 2006 HDR. But rapid economic growth

has caused industry’s share of that water to double since 1980 to 21 percent, while the

urban share has tripled. The Report estimates that demand from non-agricultural sources

will rise a further 30 percent by 2030.

As demand increases in China, poor farmers are losing their entitlements to water, often

without compensation. Attempts by water-user associations to establish water rights and

claims linked to the transfer of water have come under pressure from powerful groups in

industry and municipalities.

As people get wealthier, they get ‘thirstier’

Compounding the formidable dual challenge of competition and climate change is the fact that the number of people

who need to be fed continues to rise. And it takes more water to feed people than ever before: As people get wealthier,

they tend to eat different things, and meat and sugar are much more water-intensive to produce than wheat or rice.

Producing a single hamburger takes about 11,000 litres of water—roughly the same daily allotment as that of

500 residents of an urban slum without a household water connection.

Dependent on their increasingly volatile natural surroundings and squeezed by powerful competition for water

resources, poor farmers in the developing world risk losing the ability to make a living. The 2006 Human

Development Report makes clear that without secure water rights, better access to irrigation and help in adapting

to climate change, their water security will be eroded, and their lives will be increasingly fragile.

* * * *















E-5-1


Spectre of ‘water wars’ distracts

from urgent need for cross-border

cooperation Cooperation over water is more pervasive than conflict— and more essential than ever, says 2006 Human Development Report

Cape Town, 9 November 2006—Challenging predictions that increasing competition

for water will inevitably provoke armed conflicts, the newly released 2006 Human

Development Report finds that cross-border cooperation over water resources is

already far more pervasive and successful than is commonly presumed, offering

many models for the resolution of future international water disputes.

Ninety percent of the world’s population lives in countries that share their water supplies

with other countries. But the new Human Development Report, entitled Beyond scarcity:

Power, poverty and the global water crisis, makes clear that while this interdependence

can give rise to political tension across borders, most shared water resources are managed

peacefully through cross-border engineering and diplomacy.

In the past 50 years, there have been 37 cases of reported violence between states over

water; all but seven incidences took place in the Middle East. Yet over the same period,

more than 200 treaties on water were negotiated between countries, says the Report.

And India and Pakistan, despite two cross-border wars and constant geopolitical tension,

have for half a century jointly managed shared watersheds through the Permanent Indus

Water Commission.

That said, the need for increasing cooperation across national borders to ensure water

security for the poor is more tangible than ever, because by 2025, over three billion

people could be living in countries under water stress. False alarms of looming wars

over water only distract from the real threat posed by the global water crisis to human

development—a threat rooted in power, poverty and inequality, stress the authors.

“Managing shared water can be a force for peace or for conflict, but it is politics that

will decide which course is chosen,” said Kevin Watkins, lead author of the Report.

The road ahead

The Report identifies two broad objectives in transboundary water governance: replacing

unilateral action with multilateral cooperation, and putting human development concerns,

not power and politics, at the centre of the debate. Getting there will require backing away

from rigid sovereignty claims, strengthening political leadership, and finding a better

balance of power, says the Report, which recommends increased emphasis on the

following:

• Increasing political negotiations to build trust and increase legitimacy: Cross-border

cooperation on water depends on the willingness of riparian states to share governance.

Here, international support can help create an environment for successful cooperation,

say the authors.

E-5-2

• Assessing the human-development needs and identifying potential mutual gains: Political leaders should

identify at a basin level shared goals for human development—in poverty reduction, employment creation and

risk management— and make this an integral part of river basin planning.

• More support for river-basin organizations, including broadening their mandates and strengthening

their capacity to enforce treaties: As river-basin cooperation evolves, political leaders must raise the bar to

an appropriate level of ambition. Considering its extensive experience in transboundary water management,

the European Union, through partnerships with the United Nations Development Programme and the World

Bank, could do far more to support institutional development in poor countries, says the Report.

• Increased financing for transboundary water management: Of the US$3.5 billion in international aid spent on

water and sanitation, less than $350 million is allocated to transboundary water resources. The Report states that

donors should aim to substantially increase this amount, but in the interests of ownership, riparian countries have

to bear a substantial part of the financial burden.

Why tension over water?

Water is the ultimate fugitive resource: Rivers, lakes and aquifers cross political boundaries without passports or

documentation. One hundred forty-five countries share what are known as ‘transboundary’ water basins—catchments

or watersheds, including lakes and shallow groundwater, which are shared by neighbouring countries. And the number

is growing, largely because of the breakups of the former Soviet Union and former Yugoslavia. In 1978, there were

214 international basins; today there are 263.

Shared water has always brought potential for competition. Indeed, the English word rival comes from the Latin

rivalis, meaning ‘one using the same river as another.’ Problems start when water—from rivers, lakes, aquifers or

wetlands—is not managed properly. While most countries have institutional rules and regulations for allocating

water and resolving disputes within their boundaries, cross-border mechanisms are much weaker, and the mix of

water stress and flimsy institutions can carry a real risk of conflict.

The Middle East

Nowhere is this more starkly apparent than in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The Palestinian population is

half the size of Israel’s, but consumes only 10–15 percent as much water. In the West Bank, Israeli settlers use nearly

nine times as much water per person as Palestinians. In fact, Palestinians experience one of the highest levels of water

scarcity in the world.

Both physical availability and politics contribute to the problem. Water shortages hamper farmers’ ability to produce

food and earn a living, while existing water rules lock in unequal, and what is perceived as unjust, access to shared

aquifers.

But this doesn’t have to be the case. Better cooperation could solve the problem, as other regional examples attest.

In 1994, for example, Israel and Jordan signed an accord that allows Jordan to store winter runoff in Israel’s Lake

Tiberias. The agreement also allows Israel to lease from Jordan a number of wells to draw water for agricultural land.

What the agreement did not count on was the worst drought on record in 1999, which led to tensions as water

deliveries to Jordan fell. Still, the agreement itself remained intact—demonstrating the commitment by both sides

to cooperate over water.

Just as the Israel-Jordan water accord was a companion to the peace agreement between the two countries in 1994,

a final political settlement between Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories would need to include a pact

on their shared water resources, the Report’s authors contend.

Water scarcity is an acute problem throughout the Middle East. Iran and Iraq are the only countries in the region

above the threshold of water stress, the Report points out, and 90 percent of the population of the Middle East and

E-5-3

North Africa will live in water-scarce nations by 2025. But the arid region is far from alone in its need to find

equitable solutions to water-stress problems.

The Aral Sea

For countries like Bangladesh, which depends on India for 91 percent of its water to irrigate crops and replenish

aquifers, the case is clear for cross-border cooperation on water. For others, recognition of the need to cooperate

has come much too late. Such is the case of the Aral Sea, in Central Asia.

One of the world’s most visible environmental disasters, the Aral Sea bears testimony to the cost of non-cooperation

in transboundary water management. The diversion of water for half a century to support cotton through an inefficient

irrigation system strangled the Aral Sea, then the world’s fourth-largest lake. By the 1990s it was receiving less than

one-tenth of its previous flow—and sometimes no water at all.

Even after independence from the Soviet Union,

the new republics failed to cooperate in an

effective manner, persisting with competing

irrigation expansion schemes without any regard

to their impacts downstream. The demise of the

sea has been a social and environmental

catastrophe.

Cotton yields have fallen by a fifth since the early

1990s and the loss of four-fifths of all fish species

has ruined the once-vibrant fishing industry in

downstream provinces. People in Qyzlorda in

Kazakhstan, Dashhowuz in Turkmenistan and

Karakalpakstan in Uzbekistan receive water

contaminated with fertilizers and chemicals,

unsuitable for human consumption or agriculture.

Infant-mortality rates have reached 100 per 1,000

live births in some regions— higher than the

average for South Asia. And some 70 percent of

the 1.1 million people in Karakalpakstan suffer

from chronic maladies— respiratory illnesses,

typhoid fever, hepatitis

and oesophageal cancers.

The case of the Aral Sea perfectly illustrates how not to cooperate. It highlights that the way an upstream country

uses water affects the environment and water quality for a downstream country; that the retention of water for

irrigation or power generation in one country restricts flows downstream for farmers and the environment in another.

However, the Report notes that in an encouraging development illustrating the potential impact of rational

cooperation, some Aral Sea nations have in the past few years begun to reverse some of the damage, protecting

watersheds and controlling drainage out of the Aral Sea with new dams and canals, with the result that water levels

are rising for the first time in a generation.

There are four main obstacles to cooperation across borders over water, according to the authors: competing claims

to water and perceived national sovereignty imperatives; weak political leadership and vision; asymmetries of power;

and nonparticipation in international water-basin initiatives. Each of these will have to be addressed to avert conflict,

limit environmental degradations and ensure shared water is used to maximize opportunities for human development.

E-5-4

Case for cooperation

In theory, the most logical approach to effective cross-border water management would be countries trading

agricultural resources, hydropower and other services according to their comparative advantage in water use. To

take an obvious example, hydropower is more cost-effective in mountainous regions where water gains momentum

flowing downhill while irrigation produces better results in valleys and plains; trading hydropower for agricultural

goods is one way of tapping into this comparative advantage.

Yet in practice, most river basins lack the institutions to resolve differences and coordinate shared resources, and

factors such as trust and strategic concerns weigh heavily in government policy.

The potential gains from transboundary water management are huge. For example, Brazil and Paraguay resolved a

100-year-old boundary dispute by signing the Itaipu Accord. Financed largely by Brazilian investment, the Itaipu

dam became one of the world’s largest hydropower plants, meeting a quarter of Brazil’s energy consumption and

serving as Paraguay’s largest source of foreign-exchange earnings.

Elsewhere, the Southern African Development Community has led a process of basin-wide cooperation for the

region’s 15 transboundary rivers, focusing on collecting information and developing infrastructure to improve energy

and food security for the vulnerable while expanding water-supply schemes to small border towns and villages, in

addition to strengthening the capacity of river-basin organizations to protect their quality of and access to water.

Throughout history, cooperation over shared water resources has been the rule, not the exception. The 2006 HDR

argues that now, with more people competing for resources than ever, more ambitious and less fragmented approaches

to water governance are in the interest of everyone’s long-term security.

* * * *















action on water matters of factwaterwiki.net/images/e/ee/hdr_2006_presskit_en.pdfsupply and...

Documents