scholarly journals Water research in support of the Sustainable Development Goal 6: A case study in Belgium

2020 ◽  
Vol 277 ◽  
pp. 124082
Author(s):  
Long Ho ◽  
Alice Alonso ◽  
Marie Anne Eurie Forio ◽  
Marnik Vanclooster ◽  
Peter L.M. Goethals
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shubhagato Dasgupta ◽  
Neha Agarwal

The challenge of ensuring clean water and safely managed sanitation towards meeting the Sustainable Development Goal 6 is made more complex by unplanned urbanisation in South Asia. Nearly 50% of all toilet-owning households globally and 83% in South Asia depend on non-networked sanitation, with a multi-step service chain comprising containment, collection, conveyance, and treatment of faecal waste. Over the last few years, South Asian governments have begun to eschew the long-enduring preference for centralised sewerage infrastructure in favour of better management of non-networked sanitation as part of city-level wastewater management systems. However, these interventions have largely excluded the household-level containment systems that hold the potential to create both adverse localised and diffuse public health and environmental outcomes if dysfunctional. The present Chapter discusses evidence from a multi-state household survey in India to assess the nature and quality of containment systems in use by urban Indian households. Secondly, it reviews approaches to their governance under more evolved paradigms to inform an ecosystem-wide strategy for managing these systems in India and countries with similar contexts.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 4247
Author(s):  
Elena Bulmer ◽  
Cristina del Prado-Higuera

The seventeenth Sustainable Development Goal of the United Nations, Partnerships for the Goals, aims to strengthen the means of the implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development. The successful implantation of the UN’s seventeenth Sustainable Development Goal will aid the execution and achievement of the other sixteen goals. This article explores the importance and viability of Sustainable Development Goal 17, using a case study based in Valencia, Spain. The study presents an illustrative stakeholder situation, where we see that there are conflicting interests among conservationists, fishermen, municipality representatives, and others. Data collection was done using desk-based research and semi-structured interviews. The interview process was performed between October 2018 and October 2019. In total, 21 different stakeholders were interviewed. For the data analyses, a stakeholder register, Power–Interest Matrices, and a stakeholder map were used, and, to complement the latter, narratives were developed. The different analyses showed that most project stakeholders supported the project, while there was really only one stakeholder, the fishermen themselves, who were reticent about participating. However, it was shown over time that, by developing a common vision with them, the fishermen came on board the project and collaborated with the scientists. Stakeholder engagement analyses are especially useful in the application of Sustainable Development Goals at the project level. Although this case study is specifically applicable to a marine conservation context, it may be extrapolated and applied to any other Sustainable Development Goals’ context.


Water ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 1676
Author(s):  
Rebecca Schiel ◽  
Bruce M. Wilson ◽  
Malcolm Langford

Ten years after the United Nation’s recognition of the human right to water and sanitation (HRtWS), little is understood about how these right impacts access to sanitation. There is limited identification of the mechanisms responsible for improvements in sanitation, including the international and constitutional recognition of rights to sanitation and water. We examine a core reason for the lack of progress in this field: data quality. Examining data availability and quality on measures of access to sanitation, we arrive at three findings: (1) where data are widely available, measures are not in line with the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets, revealing little about changes in sanitation access; (2) data concerning safe sanitation are missing in more country-year observations than not; and (3) data are missing in the largest proportions from the poorest states and those most in need of progress on sanitation. Nonetheless, we present two regression analyses to determine what effect rights recognition has on improvements in sanitation access. First, the available data are too limited to analyze progress toward meeting SDGs related to sanitation globally, and especially in regions most urgently needing improvements. Second, utilizing more widely available data, we find that rights seem to have little impact on access.


Water ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 1353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Ortigara ◽  
Melvyn Kay ◽  
Stefan Uhlenbrook

In 2015, UN Member States adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6): “Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all”. Commonly known as the ‘water goal’, SDG 6 went well beyond the limited focus on water supply and sanitation in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and recognized the importance of all aspects of the water cycle in development and that water was embedded directly and indirectly in all 17 SDGs. In 2018, the UN published a report: “Sustainable Development Goal 6 Synthesis Report on Water and Sanitation 2018” (referred to in this paper as ‘the report’) that reviewed progress with SDG 6 at global and regional levels. Overall, the report concluded there was progress, but it was too slow, and the world was not on track to achieve SDG 6 by 2030 without a significant change of gear. The report was written primarily for those working in sustainable development to guide finance and resource allocation, but there was much embedded in the report that was of value to those engaged in research and in developing the much-needed capacity to plan and manage water resources, particularly in developing countries. This paper attempts to distill these issues and to ask how those involved in education, training, and research could contribute to enabling and accelerating progress towards achieving SDG 6. Three key areas of engagement were identified: the urgent need for more data and improved monitoring to assess SDG 6 progress and to enhance decision-making, the need to address the serious lack of human and institutional capacity that was constraining progress, and the challenge of taking research into policy and practice. Note: This paper is a review of selected aspects of the report (in which production the authors were chiefly involved as coordinators and editors), and as such most of the facts, figures, and discussion in this review are taken from the report. For this reason, we have not continually attributed them to the report to avoid repetition. However, in some cases, we have attributed report material to the primary sources where we considered it important to do so. We have also attributed material we have included, and which is not cited in the report. A review inevitably depends, to some extent, on the views of the reviewers and as such we have tried to make it clear where we are expressing our personal views rather than those expressed in the report. The report contains full references to all the primary sources.


Water ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 1711 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Bain ◽  
Richard Johnston ◽  
Francesco Mitis ◽  
Christie Chatterley ◽  
Tom Slaymaker

The World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), through the Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP), are responsible for global monitoring of the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets for drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH). The SDGs represent a fundamental shift in household WASH monitoring with a new focus on service levels and the incorporation of hygiene. This article reflects on the process of establishing SDG baselines and the methods used to generate national, regional and global estimates for the new household WASH indicators. The JMP 2017 update drew on over 3000 national data sources, primarily household surveys (n = 1443), censuses (n = 309) and administrative data (n = 1494). Whereas most countries could generate estimates for basic drinking water and basic sanitation, fewer countries could report on basic handwashing facilities, water quality and the disposal of waste from onsite sanitation. Based on data for 96 and 84 countries, respectively, the JMP estimates that globally 2.1 billion (29%) people lacked safely managed drinking water services and 4.5 billion (61%) lacked safely managed sanitation services in 2015. The expanded JMP inequalities database also finds substantial disparities by wealth and sub-national regions. The SDG baselines for household WASH reveal the scale of the challenge associated with achieving universal safely managed services and the substantial acceleration needed in many countries to achieve even basic services for everyone by 2030. Many countries have begun to localise the global SDG targets and are investing in data collection to address the SDG data gaps, whether through the integration of new elements in household surveys or strengthening collection and reporting of information through administrative and regulatory systems.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document