International Definitions of Access to Drinking Water and Sanitation

E Comparing International and national data on E H S

A Y T access to drinking water and sanitation R A A D M

M Afghanistan U S

Data sources UN Coverage estimates Population using Population using an The WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Population improved drinking improved Supply and Sanitation (JMP) is charged with international (thousands) water sources sanitation facility reporting on progress towards the MDG drinking water and Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total sanitation target. The JMP based its latest (2006) coverage estimates exclusively on data from national censuses and 1995 2,316 10,343 12,659 37% 17% 21% 42% 29% 32% nationally representative household sample surveys. The JMP 2000 4,412 16,325 20,737 37% 17% 21% 43% 27% 30% has the following census and sample survey data on file for Afghanistan: 2006 6,066 20,022 26,088 37% 17% 22% 45% 25% 30% - MICS 1997, 2003 2015 9,637 25,994 35,631 56%* 62%* * MDG target based on JMP 1995 coverage estimates

Sources Population data: UN population division, World Population Prospects, the 2006 Revision Coverage estimates: WHO/UNICEF JMP, 2008

International definitions of access to drinking water and sanitation MDG Target 7c calls on countries to "Halve, by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking-water and basic sanitation." The official MDG indicators to measure and report on progress towards this target are the following: - The proportion of population using an improved drinking water source, urban and rural - The proportion of population using an improved sanitation facility, urban and rural. An improved drinking-water source is defined as one that, by nature of its construction or through active intervention, is protected from outside contamination, in particular from contamination with faecal matter. To allow for international comparability of estimates, the JMP uses the following classification to differentiate between "improved" and "unimproved" drinking-water sources. Improved drinking water sources Unimproved drinking water sources Piped water into dwelling, plot or yard Unprotected dug well Piped water into neighbor’s plot Unprotected spring Public tap/standpipe Small cart with tank/drum Tubewell/borehole Tanker truck Protected dug well Surface water (river, dam, lake, pond, stream, channel, irrigation channel) Protected spring Bottled water1 Rainwater An improved sanitation facility is defined as one that hygienically separates human excreta from human contact. To allow for international comparability of estimates, JMP uses the following classification to differentiate between "improved" and "unimproved" types of sanitation facilities. Improved sanitation facilities Unimproved sanitation facilities Flush or pour-flush to: Flush or pour-flush to elsewhere 2 - piped sewer system Pit latrine without slab or open pit - septic tank Bucket - pit latrine Hanging toilet or hanging latrine Ventilated improved pit latrine (VIP) No facilities or bush or field (open defecation) Pit latrine with slab Composting toilet Public or shared sanitation facilities

National definitions and indicators of access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation (please complete or attach) Access to drinking water Access to sanitation General description: General description:

1 Bottled water is considered to be improved only when the household uses water from another improved source for cooking and personal hygiene; where this information is not available, bottled water is classified on a case-by- case basis. 2 Excreta are flushed to the street, yard or plot, open sewer, a ditch, a drainage way or other location.

Data summary sheet of drinking water and sanitation coverage in Afghanistan – UNSD and ESCAP meeting, Bangkok, January 2009 Calculation of coverage estimates for MDG monitoring by the WHO/UNICEF JMP 1995, 2000 and 2006 coverage estimates are based on nationally representative survey and census data. There are two survey data on file for Afghanistan. The WHO/UNICEF JMP has opted to base its drinking water coverage estimates on the average coverage of the two surveys. After extensive consultation with staff from international agencies active in the drinking water sector over those years the findings of MICS 1997 are deemed too low and those of MICS 2003 are deemed too high. To estimate 2006 drinking water coverage using a linear regression line, based on the least squares method drawn through the available data points would result in an even higher coverage estimate that the one found by MICS 2003. The JMP rules for estimating access allow for making an exception as is done for drinking water in Afghanistan. Afghanistan - urban - Afghanistan - rural - Access to improved drinking water sources Access to improved sanitation coverage

100.0 100.0 Estimated coverage Estimated coverage 2008 update Year Total HC Year Improved Shared Unimproved Open defecation 1990 90.0 1990 90.0 1995 37% 11% 1995 29% 39% 32% 2000 37% 11% 2000 27% 36% 37% 2006 25% 34% 41% 80.0 2006 37% 11% 80.0

70.0 70.0

60.0 60.0 MICS03

50.0 50.0

40.0 40.0

30.0 30.0 MICS97

MICS03 20.0 20.0 MICS97 MICS03 e e 10.0 10.0 g g a a r r e

e MICS97 v v o o C C

0.0 0.0 % % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year Year Total improved access Household connections (HC) Total improved access Used for estimates Used for estimates Used for estimates Estimates Estimates Estimates

Explanation of most common discrepancies between national and international coverage estimates 1) Use of different definitions of access including poorly defined access categories 2) Use of latest survey or census findings vs. use of an interpolated estimates based on linear regression 3) Use of different population estimates, including a different distribution of urban and rural populations 4) Use of “old” estimates which do not reflect all, or the latest findings of new sample surveys or a new census 5) Use of “reported” line ministry data vs. use of independently verifiable data from sample surveys or censuses Adjustments made by JMP to census and sample survey findings to ensure comparability Censuses and sample surveys often do not provide a sufficient level of disaggregation by type of drinking water source or sanitation facility used. Sometimes a facility type is not well defined and interpretation of whether or not such facility is improved is difficult. Based on other surveys on file the JMP estimates what proportion of such poorly defined categories should be considered improved. For Afghanistan this has been done in the following instance(s): Survey Facility type Adjustments made by JMP The MICS 1997 does not disaggregate between protected and unprotected springs. The proportion of protected springs of MICS 2003 is used to estimate the proportion of protected MICS 1997 Springs springs of MICS 1997. Vault latrine open and pit 50% of these facilities are considered improved in absence of a definition or information from MICS 1997 latrines another survey which allows to determine a more exact proportion of this category to be MICS 2003 Traditional pit latrine considered ‘Improved’. There is no information available on the proportion of the population that shares a toilet facility Shared sanitation facilities between two or more households

Clarification of service categories required to improve international monitoring Water Sanitation Category Vault latrine open, These sanitation categories need to be better defined in order to assess if they meet the basic √ pit latrine, hygiene criteria of an improved sanitation facility that hygienically separates human waste from traditional pit latrine human contact

Data summary sheet of drinking water and sanitation coverage in Afghanistan – UNSD and ESCAP meeting, Bangkok, January 2009 Other household surveys and census data on file but not taken into account for MDG monitoring Survey/Census Reason for exclusion for MDG monitoring Water Sanitation MICS 2000 MICS 2000 was conducted in East Afghanistan only and thus is not nationally representative √ √

Other nationally representative household surveys and census data not listed previously Please list nationally representative surveys or censuses that contain information about drinking water and sanitation coverage which are not listed on any of the previous pages Survey or census data not yet included for MDG monitoring by the WHO/UNICEF JMP Year

How to submit missing or new survey or census data for international monitoring to the UN? Data from new nationally representative household surveys and censuses, as well as from nationally representative surveys not listed in this document can be send to UNICEF’s data inbox: [email protected] and copied to: Rolf Luyendijk, Sr. Statistics and Monitoring Specialist Water and Sanitation at [email protected] . Data should be sent disaggregated by urban and rural areas and by drinking water and sanitation service category. In line with the formulation of the MDG indicators for water and sanitation, the denominator of choice is population rather than households.

National drinking water and sanitation coverage estimates and targets (Please provide your national coverage data – when available) Drinking water coverage Sanitation coverage Data source Year Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total 1990 % % % % % % 1995 % % % % % % 2000 % % % % % % 2006 % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % MDG target - - % - - % (2015) National target - - % - - % Year:

Remarks

Thank you for returning a filled out copy of this file by email to: [email protected] and the UNICEF data inbox: [email protected]

Data summary sheet of drinking water and sanitation coverage in Afghanistan – UNSD and ESCAP meeting, Bangkok, January 2009