1. Introduction

This paper is a continuation (Part 2) of an earlier paper of the same title by the same authors.

The first paper was based on a survey and analysis of over 1000 improved water points in the district of Salima and studied the effect that poor co-ordination was having on achieving the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of halving the proportion of people without safe water by 2015. The paper quantified the effect of poor coordination both in terms of wasted finances and in the failure of well intentioned donor money to meet the objective of serving the poor. It also developed an ‘equity of distribution’ indicator which enables the degree to which resources are fairly distributed to be quantified.

Since writing the first paper the survey work has continued and a water point inventory containing information on the location, age, maintenance history and condition of over 9000 water points has been developed. The work covers a population of 1.5 million people, nearly 18% of the rural population of Malawi, and contains information on 35 Traditional Areas and six districts. Arguably it is a large enough sample size to be representative of the condition of all the water points in Malawi.

With access to an increased amount of raw data, the authors re-visited the analysis process in order to verify their earlier work. Through this, further simple indicators were developed in order to assess the likelihood of achieving the Millennium Development Goal in Malawi.

This paper is divided into two sections, the first describes the results of this additional work and proposes new indicators for monitoring and evaluating the rural water sector. If adopted, these indicators could help to quantify, target and define the type of investments needed to half the proportion of people without access to safe water in Malawi. The second section uses the results of the survey to calculate the resources needed in order to ensure Malawi achieves the Millennium Development Goal and in the process defines terms such as ‘safe’ and ‘access’. It takes into consideration population growth and studies the impact that five different resource allocation strategies would have on the MDG.

For ease of understanding, Section One is based on the1998 population census figures, while in Section Two the effect of population growth is taken into consideration to gain a more accurate assessment of the MDG.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 1 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 SECTION ONE: DEFINING NEW INDICATORS

2. Methodology for data collection and analysis

2.1 Improved community water point data collection Improved water point surveys were carried out by District Assembly extension staff and Non governmental organisation (NGO) staff members in six districts in Malawi; these were Mzimba, Salima, Lilongwe, Machinga, Zomba and Mulanje (see figure 2.1). They used simple, hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS) units, which are capable of accurately marking the position of a water point, together with a simple questionnaire (see Appendix Two). They visited every improved community water point in 35 Traditional Authorities within the districts. The quality of data was verified by the district’s Supervising Monitoring Officers, who visited a randomly chosen sample of between 5% and 10% of all the surveyed sites. Additional verification visits and desk-checks were carried out by the authors and officers from the partner organisations.

A breakdown of the survey areas and the scope of the data collected is provided in figure 2.1 and table 2.1

FIGURE 2.1 LOCATION OF THE SEVEN AREAS SURVEYED (areas surveyed appear in grey fill)

2 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 TABLE 2.1. SCOPE OF SURVEY BY AREA, POPULATION AND POINTS COVERED

Partner 1998 total rural N˚ of Water Points N˚ of rural District / TA organisation / Area population surveyed Enumeration Areas Area 1 Mzimba South 149,608 1,396 113 TA M'Mbelwa 84,474 664 60 CCAP TA Mzikobula 44,577 518 35 TA Mzukuzuku 20,557 214 18 Area 2 Salima 219,730 1,112 192 SC Kambalame 9,843 58 9 SC Kambwiri 19,642 102 14 SC Msosa 4,418 6 4 SC Mwanza 12,609 47 13 WaterAid TA Karonga 42,147 257 34 TA Khombedza 44,119 225 44 TA Kuluunda 9,372 48 7 TA Maganga 35,315 119 22 TA Ndindi 26,825 204 27 TA Pemba 15,440 46 18 Area 3 Lilongwe West 173,351 441 156 InterAide TA Kalolo 100,039 299 90 TA Khongoni 73,312 142 66 Area 4 Lilongwe East 193,625 762 196 TA Chadza 76,500 219 69 InterAide TA Mazengera 72,606 340 79 TA Kalumbu 44,519 203 48 Area 5 Machinga 338,889 2,126 338 SC Chamba 16,394 112 16 SC Chikweo 36,089 166 34 SC Chiwalo 10,951 22 11 SC Mlomba 26,774 250 28 SC Mposa 17,205 130 17 WaterAid SC Ngokwe 20,476 70 19 SC Sitola 31,299 318 35 TA Kawinga 79,771 616 81 TA Liwonde 61,337 331 60 TA Nyambi TA 38,593 111 37 Area 6 Zomba East 155,506 1,214 154 InterAide TA Kutumanji 61,076 481 59 TA Mwambo 94,430 733 95 Area 7 Mulanje South 269,507 2,032 295 SC Laston Njema 46,461 248 54 TA Chikumbu 60,466 506 69 Oxfam TA Mabuka 127,892 937 130 TA Nthiramanja 34,688 341 42 Total 1,500,216 9,083 1,444

The total area surveyed contains a population of approximately 1,500,000. This is equivalent to about 18% of Malawi’s rural population. Seven areas, each comprising of at least three adjoining Traditional Authorities (TA), formed the basis of the analysis. Each area had a population of 150,000 or greater.

The Japanese International Cooperation Agency funded the survey and analysis work in all areas except four TAs in Mulanje, where the European Community Humanitarian Office funded OXFAM to carry out similar work with technical assistance from WaterAid.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 3 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 2.2 Units of population used in the analysis The survey results were entered on to a database to form an inventory of over 9000 water points. These were used to develop maps using Global Information System (GIS) technology. Rural water point densities were calculated using information from the 1998 census undertaken by the National Statistics Office based in Zomba.

Three units of population were used in the analysis: Enumeration Area, Traditional Authority and District. The information was processed by Enumeration Area level for purposes of accuracy and summarised at Traditional Authority and District levels.

The maps below illustrate the three units of population using Mulanje District as an example.

FIGURE 2.2 MULANJE DISTRICT POPULATION – CALCULATED BY ENUMERATION AREA, TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY AND DISTRICT.

1. Enumeration Area populations range from around 500 to 1500 people. (There are 450 rural Enumeration Areas within Mulanje District) 2. Traditional Authority Areas are comprised of an average 75 Enumeration Areas with populations ranging from 35,000 to 125,000 3. Mulanje District comprising six TAs, has a total population of around 400,000

4 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 2.3 Defining, calculating and using water point density data i) Water point density – a simplified overview

If a village has two thousand inhabitants and they draw their water from four boreholes situated on the edge of the village, then the village can be said to have one water point for every five hundred people. This is the village’s water point density.

Villages vary greatly in size, settlement pattern and the name by which they are known. They also often have confusing geographical boundaries. This makes the village an awkward unit around which to develop a database or carry out any analysis. A more consistent and convenient unit is the Enumeration Area, the boundaries of which have been defined by the National Statistics Office. These boundaries do not always follow physical structures on the ground, but instead are parcels of land defined mainly on a map, which contain approximately one thousand people. When viewed on a map, a geographically large Enumeration Area will probably contain a few, widely spread, small settlements and have a low population density, while a geographically small Enumeration Area will probably contain one continuous, large settlement and have a high population density.

This report uses the Improved Community Water Point Densities of the Enumeration Areas as the basis for defining coverage rates and analysing resource allocation patterns. The following box gives a definition of an Improved Community Water Point.

An improved Community Water Point (ICWP)

Any water point which is capable of providing safe water to which the people in the surrounding area have access.

Included Excluded Borehole fitted with a handpump Unlined wells without an apron Shallow well fitted with a handpump Scoop holes Shallow well fitted with a windlass Rivers, lakes, and ponds Stand tap supplied by a rural piped Privately owned water points water scheme

ii) Basic method of calculation

The basic unit of analysis in this survey is theE numeration Area Water Point Density. The water point density is the number of improved water points in an area divided by the population expressed in water points per 1000 people.

Eg If an Enumeration Area has a population of 1174 people and has two improved community water points (ICWP), the ICWP density is calculated as follows:

2 ÷ 1174 x 1000 = 1.70

This shows a density of 1.70 improved community water points per 1000 population.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 5 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 The following is a worked example showing how the mean ICWP density in an area containing seven Enumeration Areas was derived. The example concerns TA Khongoni Lilongwe District.

FIGURE 2.3 TA KHONGONI, LILONGWE DISTRICT – IMPROVED COMMUNITY WATER POINTS PER 1000 POPULATION IN EACH ENUMERATION AREA

Whole area Enumeration areas ABCDEFG(A to G)

Population 1,174 941 1,083 786 1,634 1,099 1,176 7,893

Number of ICWP2113013 11

ICWP density at EA level (per 1.70 1.06 0.92 3.82 0.00 0.91 2.55 1.57 1,000)

In this study the definition of the water point density for the whole area (in this case seven Enumeration Areas from A to G) is the arithmetic mean of each Enumeration Area water point density. This gives the whole area an ICWP density of 1.57, or a density of 1.57 improved community water points per 1000 population. The same method is used to calculate Traditional Authority and Districts ICWP densities. iii) Adjustments made in calculating Improved Community Water Point densities

Enumeration Areas do not have physical boundaries and people freely cross them to collect water. Therefore, a water point cannot be said to exclusively serve the people living in any one particular Enumeration Area and quite often water points serve the populations of two or more Enumeration Areas. To correct this potential source of error each water point was given a catchment area radius of 500 metres.

6 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 FIGURE 2.4 WATER POINT CATCHMENT ADJUSTMENT

Water Point 3 (WP3) is physically situated in Area H, but half its catchment area is located in Area E. The water point density of Area E is therefore not zero, even though there are no water points located within its boundary. Its density is 0.5 water points per 1634 population.

Using the same approach, Water Point 2 catchment area intersects Area D and F; making the water point density of Area A (where the water point is located) less than 2 water points per 1174 population.

The following table compares water point densities using water point catchment areas with water point densities that purely use the water points physical location.

Whole area Enumeration Area A B C D E F G (A to G) Population 1,174 941 1,083 786 1,634 1,099 1,176 7,893

Number of ICWP2113013 11

ICWP density at EA level using 1.70 1.06 0.92 3.82 0.00 0.91 2.55 1.57 LOCATION

ICWP density at EA level using 1.63 0.52 1.09 3.95 0.26 1.11 2.54 1.59 CATCHMENT

Using the catchment area method for calculation gives the whole area an ICWP density of 1.59, or a density of 1.59 improved community water points per 1000 population.

This compares with an Improved Community Water Point density of 1.57 when the adjustment is not used and only the physical location is considered. The difference is not significant when larger areas are considered, but it is important when looking in detail at Enumeration Areas. For example, Area B has its density divided by two when using the catchment method of analysis and the density in Area E increases from zero to 0.26. Catchment methodology has been applied in this study.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 7 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 2.4 Creating district profiles using enumeration area densities Water point densities for Enumeration Areas can be presented in the form of a graph to provide a visual representation of the results.

The following is an example of how the densities of the seven Enumeration Areas in TA Khongoni could be represented using bar charts.

Whole area Enumeration Area A B C D E F G (A to G)

ICWP density at EA level (per 1.63 0.52 1.09 3.95 0.26 1.11 2.54 1.59 1,000) using catchment

FIGURE 2.5 IMPROVED COMMUNITY WATER POINT DENSITIES AT ENUMERATION AREA LEVEL

data not sorted data sorted by ascending density

8 8

b 7 7

6 6

5 5

4 4

ICWP density ICWP 3

2 2

1 (nb of water point per 1,000 ha 1,000 per point water of (nb 1

0 0 ABCDEFG EBCFAGD Enumeration Area Enumeration Area

When larger areas are considered, such as districts, the number of Enumeration Areas being represented is high. In these cases the bars on the graph merge and a ‘district profile’ can be produced. This is useful when considering how well or poorly served one district may be compared to another.

FIGURE 2.6 ICWP DENSITIES AT ENUMERATION AREA LEVEL FOR SALIMA DISTRICT

Salima District (CENTRAL REGION) PROFILE

12.00

current WP density

b 10.00

8.00

6.00

ICWP density ICWP 4.00

2.00 (nb of water point per 1000 ha 1000 per point water of (nb

0.00 1 112131415161718191101111121131141151161171181191 8 192 EnumerationHalving Areas the number (219,730 of proportion hab.) without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 3. Analysis of results using district or traditional authority profiles

Traditional Authority or District profiles can provide important information on the

level of investment within an area over a given period equity at which the investment was made sustainability of previous investments

To draw these profiles the survey collected data on the date of water point installation and its condition. The following profiles are used:

Water point density before 1998: This represents the number of Improved Community Water Points per 1000 population in 1998

Current water point density: This represents the total number of Improved Community Water Points per 1000 population at the date of the survey ie April 2003

Density of functional water points: This represents the total number of Improved Community Water Points per 1000 population that were working at the time of the survey

In the following section the profiles show the current water point density in dark grey, the water point density in 1998 in light grey and the functional density as a black line.

As we will see in Section Two, the population growth rate has a huge impact on assessing needs for the Millennium Development Goals, however in this section for the sake of clarity and ease of understanding, the population growth rate between 1998 and 2003 has been taken to be zero.

The Ministry of Water Development recommended water point density is four functional water points per 1000 people (see 6.2 for further details)

3.1 Level and equity of investment over the last five years When water point density before 1998 is compared to the current water point density the level of investment over the last five years becomes evident. On the graph below, this is the difference between the two density profiles. The total investment is represented by the total area shaded dark grey.

For example, in Mulanje District the following profile is derived:

FIGURE 3.1 ICWP DENSITIES AT ENUMERATION ARE LEVEL FOR MULANJE DISTRICT

12.00 ICWP densities at current WPdensity Enumeration level

b 10.00 WP density before 1998 B Mulanje South 8.00 District (Southern Region)

6.00 Equity of investment

ICWP density ICWP 4.00 A

2.00 (nb of water point per 1000 per point water of (nb ha

0.00 Halving the proportion of people without11121 access314151 to617181 safe water91101111 by121 2015131141151161171181191201211221231241251261271281291 9 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003295 Enumeration Areas (269,507 hab.) On closer examination it is possible to see that investment in the already well served areas (B) has been significantly greater than that in the poorly served areas (A). It also shows that a number of Enumeration Areas have remained unserved despite significant investment and that already well served areas generally benefit the most from new investment. This pattern was found to be true in all the areas studied.

3.2 Equity of distribution Equity of distribution is an important factor to consider when planning a poverty reduction process. In a truly fair and well managed water sector there should be no, or very little difference between the levels of service (or the water point densities) for all the communities in an area. In an unfair environment where resources are poorly managed, or where influence on water point allocation is bias or uninformed, there will be a wide difference in the levels of service. i) Assessing equity using mean densities and average density deviation

It was originally thought that the mean density of a Traditional Authority would be a good indicator for the fairness of water point distribution. This however, was found not to be the case as examples of different distribution profiles in SC Mwanza and TA Pemba can demonstrate.

FIG 3.2 ICWP densities at Enumeration Area level FIG 3.3 ICWP densities at EA level SC MWANZA (Salima District) TA PEMBA (Salima District) 12 12

10 10 0

8 8

6 6 mean density mean density ICWP densityICWP 4 = 3.71 = 3.59 nos per of WP 100 4

2 2

0 0 1611 13 Enumeration Areas (12,600 hab.) 118 Enumeration 6 Areas 11 (15,440 hab.) 16

The profiles have markedly different shapes. There are a greater number of both unserved and well served Enumeration Areas in TA Pemba than in SC Mwanza. As SC Mwanza’s profile is generally flatter a visual interpretation of the profiles shows that SC Mwanza has a higher level of equity. However, the mean densities for the two TAs are roughly similar (3.71 and 3.59), showing that mean density is not a particularly useful indicator for equity.

If the average density deviation across the Enumeration Areas within the TA is calculated, it is possible to obtain a single figure that gives a truer reflection of the degree of equity. This process is outlined in detail in, ‘Reaching the Millennium Development Goal – A Malawian Perspective’, Stoupy and Sugden, 2003. This report explains that the average density deviation can be calculated by working out the water point densities for a range of Enumeration Areas and then calculating the amount by which each one differs from the mean density. The average of a range of Enumeration Area density deviations is the ‘average density deviation’.

When this process is applied to the above TAs the following is found:

TABLE 3.1 SC MWANZA TA PEMBA

Mean Density 3.71 3.59

Average Deviation 1.62 3.62

10 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 It can be seen that although the mean densities for the two TAs’ are approximately the same, the average density deviation for SC Mwanza is significantly lower (less than a half). This process has been applied in several of the areas studied and the average density deviation has been found to be a reliable indicator for equity. When translating the results, the rule applies that the lower the average density deviation, the greater the degree of equity (or the fairer the distribution). Perfectly equitable distribution would result in a figure of zero. ii) Assessing equity using the percentage of the population served by safe water

Another way to consider equity is to consider the percentage of a population living in Enumeration Areas served within different ranges of water point density.

Once again, this can be demonstrated by comparing the profiles of SC Mwanza and TA Pemba:

FIG 3.4 densite de PEPC par Unit e de Rec ens ement FIG 3.5 ICWP densities at EA level SC MWANZA (Salima District) TA PEMBA (Salima District) 12 12

10 10 . 9 EA out of 13EA 8 EA out of 18 EA 8 8 have over 2 water have over 2 water point per 1,000 point per 1,000 6 6 70 % 30 % population population

ICWP densityICWP 4 4

nos per of WP 1000 hab 2 2

0 0 1611 13 Enumeration Areas (12,600 hab.) 118 Enumeration 6 Areas 11 (15,440 hab.) 16

The profiles show the number of people living in Enumeration Areas (EA) with less than half the recommended water point density of four water points per 1000. This is equivalent to one water point being shared by per 500 people or less.

In TA Pemba 30% of the population (eight EAs out of 18) have access to safe water at this level (or above), while in SC Mwanza, 70% of the population (nine EAs out of 13) have access at this same level (and above)

This process can be extended to different ranges of water point density. In practice the following sub-divisions proved to be useful.

Density between zero and two water points per 1000 population: This is equivalent to less than half the recommended water point density of four per 1000 population. At its lower limits a density of 0.5 means that one water point is serving 2000 people while at the higher limits it means that one water point is serving 500 people.

Density between two and four water points per 1000 population: This is equivalent to between 500 and 250 people sharing the same water point.

Density between four and eight water points per 1000 population: This is equivalent to between 250 and 125 people sharing the same water point.

Density of eight water points per 1000 population and above: This is equivalent to more than twice the recommended water point density of four per 1000 population or 125 people or less sharing the same water point. A density of 18, which has been found in some areas, is equivalent one water point being shared by 55 people.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 11 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 When this is applied to Salima it is interesting to see that:

23% of the population lives in areas with a density of between zero and two water points per 1000 ie one water point being shared by 500 people or more 32% of the population lives in areas with a density of between two and four water points per 1000 ie one water point being shared by between 250 and 500 people 29% of the population lives in areas with a density of between four and eight water points per 1000, ie one water point being shared by between 125 and 250 people 16% of the population lives in areas with a density of eight water points per 1000 population and above, ie one water point being shared by between 125 or less

These differences in equity can be visualised by developing a profile of Salima and then confirmed by viewing the variation in water point densities on a map.

FIGURE 3.6 ICWP DENSITIES AT ENUMERATION AREA LEVEL

12.00 Salima District (Central Region) current WP density 10.00 b WP density before 1998 Distribution indicators

8.00

6.00 ICWP density 4.00

(nb of water point per 1000 ha 2< D <4 4< D <8 2.00 32 % 29 % D > 8 D < 2 population 16 % 23 % population 0.00 1 112131415161718191101111121131141151161171181191 192 Enumeration Areas (219,730 hab.)

FIGURE 3.7 WATER POINT DENSITY IN TA MWANZA AND TA PEMBA AT ENUMERATION AREA LEVEL

12 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 3.3 Sustainability of water points By using a profile of the density of functional water points it is possible to gain an insight into the sustainability of the water points previously constructed. The difference between the current density and the functional density shows the proportion of investment which no longer serves the population.

In the following profile for Mulanje South, sustainability is represented by the solid black line.

FIGURE 3.8 ICWP DENSITIES AT ENUMERATION ARE LEVEL FOR MULANJE DISTRICT

Mulanje South District (SOUTHERN REGION) FUNCTIONALITY

12.00 current WP density

10.00 WP density before 1998 b current density of functional WP

8.00

total invesment D >4 6.00 73 % population ICWP density 4.00

functional D >4 (nb of water point per 1000 ha 2.00 35 % population

0.00 1112131415161718191101111121131141151161171181191201211221231241251261271281291 295 Enumeration Areas (269,507 hab.)

Mulanje clearly has significant problems regarding the sustainability of its water points. Current access to improved water sources in Mulanje is poorer than in 1998, despite sizable investment in the past five years, represented by the darker grey shaded area. Only half of the water points in this area are working.

By using the functioning water point density profile it is possible to see that if all the water points were working, 73% of the population (or 210 out of 295 Enumeration Areas) would live in areas with the Ministry of Water Development’s recommended density. However the problem of keeping the water points working is so chronic that only 35% of the population actually reach this standard in practice (or 90 out of 295 Enumeration Areas).

This is clearly visible on the following maps where total water point density is compared to functional water point density.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 13 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 14 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 3.4 Understanding and using density profiles It can take a little time to understand a density profile as the information it contains is in a format that most people are unfamiliar with. However, with practice, the reader will soon begin to recognise the different characteristics of a profile and become proficient in there interpretation. This section is designed to guide the newcomer to density profiles in how to understand the information they contain. Consider the profiles of South Mzimba and Lilongwe West:

FIGURE 3.11 ICWP DENSITIES AT ENUMERATION ARE LEVEL FOR MZIMBA DISTRICT

South Mzimba District (NORTHERN REGION) PROFILE

12.00 current WP density

10.00 WP density before 1998 b current density of functional WP

8.00

6.00

ICWP density ICWP 4.00

4< funct. D <8 funct. D >8 (nb of water pointha per 1000 2.00 2< D <4 41 % 20 % 30 % population population 0.00 1D <2 112131415161718191101111 9 % 113 Enumeration Areas (149,600 hab.)

FIGURE 3.12 ICWP DENSITIES AT ENUMERATION ARE LEVEL FOR LILONGWE WEST DISTRICT

Western Lilongwe District (CENTRAL REGION) PROFILE 12.00 current WP density

10.00 WP density before 1998 b

current density of functional WP 8.00 4< funct. D <8 4 % 6.00 2< funct. D <4 16 % ICWP density 4.00

(nb of water point per 1000 ha 2.00 funct. D <2 80 % population 0.00 1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91 101 111121 131 141 151 156 Enumeration Areas (173,351 hab.)

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 15 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 i) Area covered by profile

One of the first things that should strike the reader is the difference in the size of the overall profile. The profile for South Mzimba is large with about two thirds of the total graph area being covered. In comparison Lilongwe West’s profile is small and the profile only covers about a fifth of the area.

The greater the area covered by the profile, the greater the number of water points in an area, and the better served the population.

In the example it can be seen that South Mzimba has significantly higher water point densities and in general the communities are far better served. ii) Shape of profile

The shape of the profile can give a quick visual indication as to the equity at which the water facilities have been distributed. A concave shaped curve represents poor equity distribution. The Enumeration Areas on the right hand side of the profile are significantly better served than the Enumeration Areas on the left. If the curve starts at higher level than zero on the horizontal axis it means that some of the Enumeration Areas are completely unserved.

A convex shaped curve represents better equity distribution. The Enumeration Areas on the right hand side of the profile are roughly served the same as the Enumeration Areas on the left. The steeper the curve on the left hand side of the profile, the fewer the number of poorly served enumeration areas.

A straight line is the theoretical target for perfect equity of distribution. It means that all the Enumeration Areas are served at the same service levels and no areas have either been favoured or excluded.

The flatter the profile curve, the greater the degree of equity in the distribution of the water points in the area.

In the example above it can be seen that the South Mzimba profile is closest to a convex shaped curve and therefore has better equity of distribution. Lilongwe West on the other hand has a concave shaped profile meaning that the equity of distribution is poor.

16 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 iii) Level of investment over the last five years

This is represented by the darker shaded area on the upper part of the curve (more details in section 3.1).

The larger the darker shaded area on the upper part of the curve, the greater the level of investment over the last five years.

The shape of the dark grey band can also indicate the equity of the recent investments:

If the recent investment has been carried out in an equitable way the dark grey band will be of equal thickness across the whole of the profile If the recent investment has been carried out in a pro-poor way the dark grey band will be thicker on the left hand side of the profile and thinner on the right hand side If the recent investment has been carried out in a biased way the dark grey band will be thinner on the left hand side of the profile and thicker on the right hand side.

See Appendix One for a detailed table of results at Traditional Authority level. iv) Functionality line

This is perhaps the most important line as it is the one that links the process into the Millennium Development Goal. This thick black line shows the distribution of functioning water points in an area and is important because if the water point is not working, the community the water point serves cannot be said to have access to a safe supply.

If all the water points in an area were working the thick black line would exactly follow the dark grey profile of water point density. If they were all broken the thick black line would lie flat on the horizontal axis. The following rule applies to interpretation:

The closer the black functionality line is to the top of the profile, the higher the percentage of water points in an area are working.

In the example above it can be seen that the black functionality line in South Mzimba lies below the water point density profile showing that not all the water points in the area are working. In Lilongwe West the black functionality line lies below the 1998 water point density profile indicating that despite the investment of the last five years, the communities now have poorer service levels than they did in 1998 (if we assume that all ICWP were working at that time).

It is only by studying profiles from other areas (see Appendix 3) that it is possible to make comparisons with regard to functionality. If this were to occur it would be found that Lilongwe West is in fact closer to the norm in Malawi, than Mzimba. South Mzimba is one of the best performers regarding functionality within Malawi. This is probably due to an active maintenance network of mechanics organised by a local church. v) Percentages of population living in Enumeration Areas served with the different ranges of functional water point densities

The information on the profiles on this issue can be summarised by the following table -

TABLE 3.2

% of population living in Enumerations Areas with functional water point density of District population D< 2 2< D<4 4< D<8 D> 8 total

Mzimba South 149,608 9% 30% 41% 20% 100%

Lilongwe West 173,351 80% 16% 4% 0% 100%

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 17 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 In Mzimba South 39% of the population is living in Enumeration Areas that do not have access to safe water at the density specified by the MoWD.

In Lilongwe West 96% of the population is living in Enumeration Areas that do not have access to safe water at the density specified by the MoWD.

80% of the population in Lilongwe West have to share an improved water point with 500 people or more.

The greater the percentage of the population in Enumeration Areas with a functional density of four or less, the greater the number of unserved in the area, the greater the need for a programme to either improve the long term functionality of the existing water points and / or invest in providing new supplies.

3.5 Mapping of figures obtained from the profiles The results can also be presented in the form of a map where the differences at either district or Traditional Authorities level can be highlighted.

The following maps (Fig 3.13 and Fig 3.14) show the level of investment and the functionality of water points in the surveyed area.

The map in Section Two (Fig 7.1) shows the percentage of the population without access to water at Traditional Authorities level in the areas surveyed.

18 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 FIGURE 3.13 COMPARISON OF LEVELS OF INVESTMENT BETWEEN 1998 AND 2002

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 19 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 FIGURE 3.14 COMPARISON OF LEVELS OF CURRENT FUNCTIONALITY IN SURVEYED AREAS

20 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 4 Further analysis of results

At the time of writing, the process of data entry was still in progress and the size of the data base was growing. Time has not allowed for any real in-depth analysis and this is planned in the near future where the findings will be reported.

Some basic analysis has been possible, but this has tended to lead to more questions, rather than providing any real answers.

For example if we examine for example the total areas surveyed, the poor equity in distribution of resources becomes very apparent. 19% of the population live in Enumeration Areas with a water point density of between zero and two water points per 1000 while 24% of the population live in Enumeration Areas with a water point density greater than eight water points per 1000. It also shows that around ten times the level of investment has been directed to the better served areas than has been to the poorly served, low water point density areas.

FIGURE 4.1 WATER POINT DENSITY PROFILE FOR ALL AREAS SURVEYED

WATER POINT TOTAL DENSITY PROFILE

12.00

current WP density 10.00 WP density before 1998 b

8.00

6.00 ICWP density 4.00 (nb of water point per 1000 ha 2.00 2< D <4 4< D <8 D >8 D <2 24 % 33 % 24 % 19 % population population population 0.00 1112131415161718110191111121131141151161171181191201211221231241251261271281291301311321331341351361371381391401411421431441451461471481491501511521531541551561571581591601611621631641651661671681691701711721731741751761771781791801811821831841851861871881891901911921931941951961971981100199110111021103110411051106110711081109111011111112111311141115111611171118111911201121112211231124112511261127112811291130113111321133113411351136113711381139114011411142114311441 1,444 Enumeration Areas (1,500,000 hab.)

TABLE 4.1

N˚ of functional investment 1998- % of total number of % of functional ICWP per 1,000 population 2003 (N˚ of ICWP population ICWP ICWP (density) per 1,000) 0 - 2 288,865 19% 0.46 287 62% 2 - 4 359,201 24% 1.33 1072 65% 4 - 8 489,857 33% 2.89 2882 61% > 8 362,293 24% 4.05 4044 61% Total 1,500,216 100% 2.2 8285 60%

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 21 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 What is surprising is the comparable functionality of the water points across the different densities. Conventional wisdom would have predicted that the functionality for the lower density areas should have been worse than that in the higher density areas. This argument is based on the assumptions that the:

x Water points in the lower density areas are used by a greater number of people and consequently break down more frequently People in the lower density areas are poorer and cannot afford to maintain their water points and so quickly abandon them Higher density areas generally have newer facilities which are more reliable and need less maintenance

Clearly if the functionality is about the same across all the densities, one or all of these assumptions cannot be true. This area needs to be further investigated.

When the functional water point density for the total area surveyed is considered the following profile is derived:

FIGURE 4.2 FUNCTIONAL WATER POINT DENSITY PROFILE FOR ALL AREAS SURVEYED

12.00 current WP density Water point functional density profile 10.00 WP density before 1998

b current density of functional WP 8.00 sity 6.00 den WP IC 4.00 (nb of water point per 1000 ha 2< D <4 4< D <8 D >8 2.00 27 % 24 % 8 % D <2 population population 41 % 0.00 1112131415161718110191111121131141151161171181191201211221231241251261271281291301311321331341351361371381391401411421431441451461471481491501511521531541551561571581591601611621631641651661671681691701711721731741751761771781791801811821831841851861871881891901911921931941951961971981100199110111021103110411051106110711081109111011111112111311141115111611171118111911201121112211231124112511261127112811291130113111321133113411351136113711381139114011411142114311441 1,444 Enumeration Areas (1,500,000 hab.)

TABLE 4.2

N˚ of functional % of total ICWP per 1,000 population number of ICWP population (density) 0 - 2 605,560 41% 1616

2 - 4 408,494 27% 2161

4 - 8 362,126 24% 2859

> 8 124,036 8% 1649

Total 1,500,216 100% 8285

If all the water points were working 19% of the population would be living in Enumeration Areas with a low water point density ie between 0 and 2 ICWP/1000. This increases to 41% when only the functioning water points are considered. This same pattern can be seen within the high water point density areas where the percentage of the population living in Enumeration Areas with a water point density of eight or more water points per 1000 people, falls from 24% to 8% when only the functioning water points are considered.

The poor sustainability of water points in Malawi is worrying from two aspects. Firstly because despite the heavy investment, access to safe water is not improving and progress towards reaching the Millennium Development Goal seems to be going backwards. Secondly because a lot of the water points that are currently functioning are comparatively new and it is not until they are a year or two older that real maintenance problems begin to occur.

22 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 SECTION TWO: CALCULATING AND UNDERSTANDING NEEDS FOR THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOAL

5 Introduction

Calculating half the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 may on the surface seem to be a simple process, but it is in fact one that is quite complex due to the number of variables involved. The quotation “lies, dam lies and statistics” springs to mind and care is needed in choosing the method of calculation, to ensure that that the findings are neither inflated nor played down in order to suit the needs of the organisation performing the analysis. The main variables are in defining ‘safe’ and ‘access’ and in estimating the population growth. This section starts by defining these variables and then works out the population without access to safe water from the results of the GPS/ GIS survey. The final part of this section presents five strategies for the allocation of resources and estimates the cost of achieving the MDG for each of the strategies.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 23 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 6 Defining ‘safe water’, ‘access’ and population growth

6.1 Defining ‘safe water’ As outlined in Section 2.3, safe water has been defined in terms of the method used in supplying water to the consumer.

Safe water is provided by boreholes fitted with a handpump, shallow wells fitted with a handpump, shallow wells fitted with a windlass and stand taps supplied by a rural piped water scheme. Unsafe water is provided by unlined wells without an apron, scoop holes, rivers, lakes, and ponds.

It is known this is not a hard and fast rule as boreholes have been found to provide both bacterial and chemically contaminated water while scoop holes have been found to provide safe water. However, on a survey of this scale, testing the water quality of each water point would be prohibitively expensive and laborious. It has therefore been necessary to make some general assumptions in this area.

6.2 Defining ‘access’ using water point densities Measuring and defining access to a safe water supply has become a controversial topic when discussing the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal. In this paper access is defined in terms of water point density.

In practice access to safe water is governed by the rights (legal or social) of the people to take water from an improved source and is influenced by the: Time taken queuing at the water point Distance to the improved water point Cost of the water from the improved source Perceived quality of the water Yields or discharge rates Proximity to other water sources Attitudes of users towards using an improved supply Functionality and reliability of the source Sustainability of the aquifer

These are difficult factors to incorporate into any one indicator and even more difficult to accurately measure. The time taken to collect water from an improved source encompasses many of these factors, but is notoriously difficult to assess in practice as life in the majority of African villages is not yet governed by time. The women whose role it is to collect water very rarely own watches. When one of the authors was working in rural Nigeria the closest measure for time taken to collect water was gauged by the question, “Does it take longer or shorter than the time it takes to cook a yam.”

The Ministry of Water Development in Malawi states that one water point should serve 250 people, which is the same as saying the recommended improved water point density should be four water points per 1000 population. It also states that the water point should be within 500m of the home.

Within this paper ‘access’ is interpreted as meaning the following

If an Enumeration Area has a functional improved water point density of less than four water points per thousand, then the people living in that area are assumed to be under served.

If an Enumeration Area has a functional improved water point density of four per 1000 or above, it is considered that the Enumeration Area is adequately served and that they have achieved the recommended standard for access

In measuring the water point density, the distance to the water point is taken into consideration by creating a radius of users 500 metres around each water point. This helps ensure greater accuracy and is outlined in

24 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 Section 2.3. However, the assumption is made that the water points within an Enumeration Area are evenly distributed, and in practice examples have been found where this is not the case. If a village headman has only favoured the residents in close proximity to his own home, it is possible for all the water points to be clustered within a square kilometre or so. The rest of the Enumeration Area may not contain any improved water points and the residents would have further than 500meters to walk to the nearest safe source. They cannot, in truth, be considered to have access to safe water, but when using the water point density method to assess access, it is likely that they would be shown to be adequately served.

Using the Improved Water Point Density to assess access is therefore, like most other indicators, an approximation of the truth and errors can occur. The size of these errors must, within the context of this research, be accepted particularly when considering the complexities of the tasks involved in measuring and defining access. All the assumptions made in the calculation process are summarised in Section 9.

6.3 Estimating population growth In section one, the calculations are based on the population in 1998, but in order to ensure greater accuracy, population growth has to be taken into consideration. The most accurate data available is from the 1998 census and since this time there has been no official updates. It is known that the impact of HIV/Aids and population migration results in an irregular growth rate, but it has proved impossible to obtain any accurate information on the effect of these factors.

For the purpose of this report, the overall growth rates outlined in the UNDP Human Development Report 2003 have been used. This report states that the growth rate for Malawi was 3.1 % between 1975 and 2001 and is predicted to be 1.9% between 2000 and 2015.

Total population of studied area in 1998 (NSO census) 1,500,216 Estimate population in 2003 (3.1% growth rate from 1996 to 2001, 1.9% for 2002 and 2003) 1,707,175 Estimate population in 2015 (1.9% growth rate from 2001 to 2015) 2,139,776

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 25 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 7 Calculating half the proportion of population without access to safe water using water point densities

7.1 Calculating population without access to safe water If an Enumeration Area has a water point density greater than four water points per 1000 population, the assumption is made that all the people in that area are adequately served. If an Enumeration Area has a water point density of less than four water points per 1000 population, the assumption is made that some of the population in the area are served while others are unserved.

The actual proportion of unserved in an area depends on the water point density of the area and is calculated by subtracting the density from four and turning the result into a percentage of four. For example, if an Enumeration Area had a density of three water points per 1000, the percentage unserved would be:

( 4 – 3 ) ÷ 4 x 100 = 25%

This is possibly easier to visualise if it is applied to a range of densities in a hypothetical Traditional Authority

Enumeration Areas ABCDEFG ICWP density at EA level 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 (per 1,000) Percentage of population 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% 0% 0% without access to safe water

The Enumeration Areas E, F and G are currently adequately served or over-served, and the population in these areas are assumed to have access to safe water. The Enumeration Areas A, B, C, and D are currently underserved to differing extents and have different proportions of populations without access. In Enumeration Area ‘A’ where the water density is zero, the whole population can be regarded as being without access.

To calculate the actual number of people without access, the percentage without access to safe water is multiplied by the population of the Enumeration Area. If Enumeration Area ‘B’ had a population of 1200 and a percentage without access of 75%, the population unserved would be

1,200 x 75% = 900

In the following table the above process has been applied to the seven Enumeration Areas in TA Mwambo in Zomba District.

Whole area Enumeration areas ABCDEFG(A to G) Population 988 974 776 410 964 984 718 5,814 ICWP density at EA level (per 7.22 1.20 3.46 6.48 0.00 2.21 4.27 3.55 1,000) % of population without access 0% 70% 14% 0% 100% 45% 0% 38% to safe water Population without access to 0 682 105 0 964 440 0 2,191 safe water

Using this method of calculating the MDG is more accurate than the method outlined in section 3.4(v) as it estimates the total number of people unserved as opposed to the number of people living in Enumeration Areas below the recommended density specified by the MoWD

26 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 7.2 Allowing for population growth when calculating the population without access to safe water Water point densities will gradually decline over time purely because populations continue to grow while the number of water points remains the same. Population growth rates must be taken into consideration when calculating requirements to achieve the MDG.

Take the example of an Enumeration Area with a population of 718 and a water point density of 4.27 (see ‘G’ in table below). Currently the Enumeration Area can be said to have no unserved population as the water point density is greater than four. However, assuming that the population grew at a rate of 1.9% and that no new water points were installed; the population in 2015 would be 1024 and the water point density would have fallen to 2.99. This equates to a prediction that 258 people will be without access to safe water in 2015 and an additional water point will be needed to ensure that they are supplied to the recommended level.

In the following table this calculation has been applied to the seven Enumeration Areas, (labelled A to G) of TA Mwambo ;

Whole area Enumeration Areas ABCDEFG(A to G) Population 2003 988 974 776 410 964 984 718 5,814

2003 ICWP density 7.22 1.20 3.46 5.48 0.00 2.21 4.27 3.41

Estimate population 2015 1,409 1,389 1,107 585 1,375 1,403 1,024 8,293

Estimate ICWP density 5.06 0.84 2.43 3.84 0.00 1.55 2.99 2.39 calculated with 2015 pop. % of population without access 0% 79% 39% 4% 100% 61% 25% 49% to safe water in 2015 Population without access to 0 1,097 436 23 1,375 860 258 4,048 safe water in 2015

With a 1.9% growth rate, only Enumeration Area A will remain served to the recommended level in 2015 if no further water points are provided, while areas D and G, although currently adequately served, will fall below the recommended standard and will contain people without access to safe water in 2015.

The following table and map summarise the results of this process for each of the 1444 Enumeration Areas surveyed. Results are summarised by Traditional Authorities (map) and districts (table):

TABLE 7.1

2015 pop. 2003 2005 2003 total 2003 population 2015 total without access if Area unserved as unserved as population without access population no additional WP percentage percentage provided

Mzimba South 170,247 20,905 12% 213,388 38,297 18%

Salima 250,042 94,368 38% 313,404 141,031 45%

Lilongwe West 197,265 145,458 74% 247,253 194,494 79%

Lilongwe East 220,336 89,949 41% 276,170 138,977 50%

Machinga 385,640 162,336 42% 483,361 239,507 50%

Zomba East 176,959 74,690 42% 221,800 111,796 50%

Mulanje South 306,686 131,647 43% 384,401 192,171 50%

1,707,175 719,352 42% 2,139,777 1,056,273 49%

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 27 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 FIGURE 7.1 THE PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION WITHOUT ACCESS TO SAFE WATER

28 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 When a growth rate of 1.9% is applied to the whole of the area surveyed, it has been calculated that 719,352 people (42% of the population) are unserved with safe water in 2003. The population without access will rise to 1,056,273 in 2015, if no additional water points are provided. This figure represents 49% of the population in 2015.

If the MDG is to be achieved, this will need to be reduced to 21% (half the 42% unserved in 2003).

7.3 Calculating new water point requirements Once the population without access has been estimated the number of additional water points required to serve this population can be calculated, however care needs to be taken.

When calculating the number of water points needed, simply dividing the population without access by 250 would result in fractions of water points. To avoid this the numbers have been calculated in accordance with the following table:

Range of population Number of water point unserved allocated 0 to 25 0 26 to 375 1 376 to 625 2 626 to 875 3 876 to 1,125 4 1,126 to 1,375 5 Every additional 250 1

In the following table this calculation has been applied to the seven Enumeration Areas, labelled A to G, of TA Mwambo;

Whole area Enumeration areas ABCDEFG(A to G) Population without access to 0 1,097 436 23 1,375 860 258 4,048 safe water in 2015 N˚ of WP needed to supply 0420531 15 100% pop. without access

The whole Traditional Authority area (A to G) has a current requirement of 16 water points in order to be 100% served. When this process was applied to all of the 1444 Enumeration Areas surveyed it was found that:

2472 new working water points will be required by 2015 in order to achieve the MDG in the surveyed areas.

These new water points will reduce the predicted 1,056,273 unserved population in 2015 to 449,350. This figure represent 21% of the total predicted total population living in the surveyed area in 2015.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 29 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 7.4 Applying half the proportion without access to safe water If the above methodology for deriving the target is accepted; the next question is how the 21% target should be achieved and specifically how can the existing poor levels of equity in water point distribution be addressed?

The desired 21% unserved target could be achieved by halving the number of unserved populations on a district by district basis. The outcome of this would be as follows:

TABLE 7.2

2015 population N˚ of Water % pop. without 2015 total without access if % pop. without Points required Area access in 2015 if population no additional WP access in 2003 by 2015 to reach MDG reached provided MDG

Mzimba South 213,388 38,297 12% 6% 114

Salima 313,404 141,031 37% 19% 344

Lilongwe West 247,253 194,494 74% 37% 375

Lilongwe East 276,170 138,977 41% 20% 359

Machinga 483,361 239,507 42% 21% 564

Zomba East 221,800 111,796 42% 21% 272

Mulanje South 384,401 192,171 43% 22% 443

2,139,777 1,056,273 42% 21% 2472

Yet while the overall target of 21% has been achieved, there are still significant differences in the levels of service between the areas. By using this method of calculation, 6% of the population in Mzimba South would be without access in 2015, while in Lilongwe West the figure would be 37%. The same principle applies if this method of achieving 21% is used for each of the Enumeration Areas. If an Enumeration Area was known to have 20% of its population unserved in 2003, halving the proportion by 2015 would mean reducing the number of unserved to 10% (or ensuring the Enumeration Area was 90% covered). If a neighbouring Enumeration Area had 80% of its population currently unserved, the MDG would have been said to have been achieved if 40% were unserved in 2015.

By taking this route for calculating the proportion of the population unserved, it would be possible to achieve the MDG but still have two neighbouring Enumeration Areas or districts with significantly different coverage rates. This method of calculation is fundamentally unfair as it maintains the current poor equity and does nothing to correct the errors and biases of the past.

If this process was applied to the seven Enumeration Areas in TA Mwambo, the following would result:

Whole area Enumeration areas ABCDEFG(A to G) Estimate population 2015 1,409 1,389 1,107 585 1,375 1,403 1,024 8,293 Population without access in 0 1,097 436 23 1,375 860 258 4,048 2015 if no new invesments % of population without access 0% 70% 14% 0% 100% 45% 0% 38% in 2003 N˚ of ICWP needed to reach 0210321 10 MDG by 2015 % of population remaining 0% 35% 7% 0% 50% 22% 0% 19% without access in 2015

The MDG has been achieved and the proportion of unserved for the whole area has reduced from 38% in 2003 to 19% in 2015. However, there are still significant differences in levels of services with Area E having 50% of its population without access and Area B, 35%.

30 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 A fairer, more equitable, way would be to ensure that resources were targeted at the Enumeration Areas which are currently poorly served, while at the same time ensuring that the overall unserved proportion of the rural population is reduced to 21%. This process was applied to the seven Enumeration Area’s of TA Mwambo and the following results obtained:

Whole area Enumeration areas ABCDEFG(A to G) Estimate population 2015 1,409 1,389 1,107 585 1,375 1,403 1,024 8,293

Population without access in 0 1,097 436 23 1,375 860 258 4,048 2015 if no new invesments

% of population without access 0% 70% 14% 0% 100% 45% 0% 38% in 2003 N˚ of ICWP needed to reach 0310420 10 MDG by 2015 % of population remaining 0% 25% 17% 4% 27% 26% 25% 19% without access in 2015

In this example, the resources have been targeted at Enumeration Areas B, C, E, and F with the currently better served areas, A, D, and G, receiving no additional water points. The overall result is that the inequity between the Enumeration Areas has been partially addressed and the differences in the levels of service has decreased. The average level of unserved in the whole TA is 19% (half 2003 level of 38%), and the levels of unserved in the Enumeration Areas ranges from 4% to 27%.

It has been calculated that if all the 1444 surveyed Enumeration Areas were provided with water points so that the minimum level of unserved population was 28%, the overall level of unserved for the whole area would be 21%. When applied to the surveyed area the results are given below :

TABLE 7.3

Mzimba South 213,388 38,297 12% 10% 67 Salima 313,404 141,031 37% 20% 324 Lilongwe West 247,253 194,494 74% 27% 512 Lilongwe East 276,170 138,977 41% 24% 308 Machinga 483,361 239,507 42% 22% 553 Zomba East 221,800 111,796 42% 23% 254 Mulanje South 384,401 192,171 43% 21% 454 2,139,777 1,056,273 42% 21% 2472

Areas currently poorly served such as Lilongwe West would have their levels of unserved population reduced from 79% to 27%, while those areas which are currently better such as Mzimba South would only see a slight reduction from 12% to 10%. The net result is a more equitable distribution of resources.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 31 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 8 Comparing the impact of different resource allocation strategies on achieving the millennium development

As can be seen in Section One of this report, the equity of resources allocation within the water sector has generally been poor - the well served areas have repeatedly gained additional facilities while the unserved areas have continued to be ignored. This section of the report explores the effect that a poor resource allocation process could have on achieving the MDG and whether the levels of investment needed to achieve the goal are realistic.

8.1 Comparing the impact of five different investment strategies Five different resource allocation scenarios have been defined and the cost and effectiveness of achieving the MDG calculated. As a reminder, the minimum level of investment needed to reach the MDG by 2015 is 2472 new functional water points. The assumption has been made that all new water points continue to work until 2015 once installed.

Scenario A : Even allocation of the 2472 water points to each of the 1444 Enumeration Areas at a rate of 206 water points per year for the next twelve years (from 2003 to 2015). Each Enumeration Area would in effect gain an additional 1.7 water points by 2015.

Result: The MDG would not be achieved and 596,600 people (27.9% of the population) would remain unserved in 2015 . A total of 337 Enumeration Areas would remain with a water point density of less than two per 1000 population.

Scenario B : Even allocation of just enough water points to each of the 1,444 Enumeration Areas so that the end result is that 21% of the population would remain unserved by 2015.

Result: The MDG would be achieved with 451,000 people (21.1% of the population) remaining unserved in 2015. A total of 172 Enumeration Areas would remain with a water point density of less that two per 1000 population. This scenario would need a further 948 water points than Scenario A and cost 38% more.

Scenario C : Even allocation of water points to each of the 1444 Enumeration Areas with double the predicted level of investment required to meet the MDG ie 4944 water points provided at a rate of 412 per year for the next twelve years (from 2003 to 2015). Each Enumeration Area would in effect gain an additional 3.4 water points by 2015.

Result: The MDG would be achieved with 259,500 people (12.1% of the population) remaining unserved in 2015. A total of 36 Enumeration Areas would remain with a water point density of less that two per 1000 population. This scenario would need a further 2472 water points than Scenario A and cost 100% more.

Scenario D : Providing water points only to Enumeration Areas where it has been predicted that 28% or more of the population will be unserved in 2015. Enumeration Areas where less than 28% of the population have been predicted to be unserved in 2015 will receive nothing. Water points would be provided at a rate of 206 per year for the next twelve years (between 2003 and 2015).

Result: The MDG would be achieved with 451,000 people (21.1% of the population) remaining unserved in 2015. No Enumeration Areas would remain with a water point density of less that two per 1000 population. This scenario would need no additional resources than Scenario A and would cost the same amount of money.

Scenario E : The targeting of water points to Enumeration Areas as in Scenario D, but providing the same number of water points as in Scenario B.

Result: The MDG would be achieved by 2009 with 215,000 people (10.1% of the population) remaining unserved in 2015. No Enumeration Areas would remain with a water point density of less that two per 1000 population. This scenario would need the same amount of money as Scenario B, but result in half as many people being left unserved.

32 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 Summary of the results comparing different investment strategies

TABLE 8.1

additional distribution of N˚ of Eas N˚ of people % pop. N˚ of Water total cost of n˚ of the WP within remaining with remaining remaining Points per scenario in $US scenario Water the density of less without without year until (@ $4,000 per Points by Enumeration than 2 WP per access in access in 2015 WP) 2015 Areas 1,000 in 2015 2015 2015

scenario A 2472 206 even 337 596,628 27.9% $9,888,000

scenario B 3420 285 even 172 450,703 21.1% $13,680,000

secnario C 4944 412 even 36 259,527 12.1% $19,776,000

scenario D 2472 206 targeted 0 452,194 21.1% $9,888,000

scenario E 3420 285 targeted 0 215,341 10.1% $13,680,000

When the results are developed into profiles, the following are produced:

FIG 8.1: ENUMERATION AREAS WATER POINT DENSITY PROFILE SCENARIOS A,B AND C (EVEN DISTRIBUTION)

evolution of functional Water Point density by 2015 7 2003 functional Water Point density 6

0 5 2015 C B A 4

ICWP density 2003 2 (nb of water point per 1,00 1

0 1112131415161718110191111121131141151161171181191201211221231241251261271281291301311321331341351361371381391401411421431441451461471481491501511521531541551561571581591601611621631641651661671681691701711721731741751761771781791801811821831841851861871881891901911921931941951961971981991100110111021103110411051106110711081109111011111112111311141115111611171118111911201121112211231124112511261127112811291130113111321133113411351136113711381139114011411142114311441 1,444 Enumeration Areas (1,500,000 hab.)

FIG 8.2: ENUMERATION AREAS WATER POINT DENSITY PROFILE SCENARIO D AND E (TARGETING THE MOST UNSERVED AREAS)

evolution of functional Water Point density by 2015 7 2003 functional Water Point density

6 )

ICWP density ICWP 2015 - E 3 2015 - D (nb of water point per 1,000

2 2003 1

0 Halving the proportion1112131415161718110191111121131141151161171181191201 211of221231241251 261people271281291301311321331341351361371381391401 411without421431441451461471481491501511521531541551561571 access581591601611621631641651661671681691701711 721to731741751761 771781safe791801811821831841851861 871water8818919019119219319419519619719811001 9911011by10211031104110511061 107120151081109111011111112111311141115111611171118111911201121112211231124112511261127112811291130113111321133113411351136113711381139114011411142114311441 1,444 Enumeration Areas (1,500,000 hab.) 33 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 It can be seen from the profiles that scenario A, B and C have no impact on the equity of service provision, while scenarios D and E dramatically change the shape of the profile to the benefit of the poorly served Enumeration Areas.

8.2 Comparing effectiveness of the different scenarios at achieving the MDG

Scenarios A and D have the same level of investment of 206 water points per year. In the graph below the progress these scenarios make towards reaching the MDG is plotted against the gradual reduction in the unserved population:

1,350,000 FIG 8.3 population unserved if no additional investment 1,250,000 Millennium Development Goal The targeting process scenario A (even distribution of water points) in Scenario D enables 1,150,000 scenario D (targeted distribution of water points) the MDG to be achieved by 2015, 1,050,000 but in Scenario A, where the resources 950,000 are evenly spread across all the 850,000 Enumeration Areas, 750,000 the progress towards reaching the MDG 650,000 line is slow. The actual lines converge

population without access to access population without safe water 550,000 in 2027, twelve years after the targeted 450,000 allocation process has met the MDG 350,000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Scenarios B and E have the same level of investment of 285 water points per year. In the graph below the rates at which these scenarios reach the MDG

1,350,000 population unserved if no additional investment FIG 8.4 1,250,000 Millennium Development Goal r scenario B (even distribution of water points) The targeting 1,150,000 scenario E (targeted distribution of water points) process in Scenario E enables the MDG 1,050,000 to be achieved by 2009, while in 950,000 Scenario A, where the resources are 850,000 evenly spread across all the 750,000 Enumeration Areas, 650,000 the MDG will be achieved six years 550,000 later in 2015. The population without access to safe wate total cost of the 450,000 scenarios are the same. 350,000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

34 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 8.3 Financing the sector to reach the millennium development goal

In the survey the date of installation of the water point was recorded and from this information it is possible to calculate the amount of money spent within the water sector over the past five years. The results are as follows:

FIG 8.5 WATER POINT INVESTMENT 1998 – 2002

$4,000,000 Water Points hardware investments in USD from 1998 to 2002

$3,000,000

$2,000,000

Level of investment $1,000,000 required for Scenarios B and E (285 water points $1,140,000 $0 per year) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

If the assumption is made that each water point cost $US4000, the investment in new water points in the surveyed area over the last five years has been $US13.98 million, or an average of $US 2.76 million per year (the equivalent of 699 water points per year). If this amount is extrapolated to the whole of rural Malawi, the expenditure on new water points would have been in the region of $US77.67 million.

All five of the scenarios cited above need less than $US 2.76 million per year to implement and the most cost effective scenarios, D and E, would need $US 0.82 million and $US 1.14 million a year respectively.

Therefore, if $US 2.76 million per year was invested in a targeted manner at the most poorly served Enumeration Areas, it would be theoretically possible to achieve the MDG in 3.5 years ie by 2007.

The surveyed area represents 18% of the national rural population and as such is a reasonable sample size to allow such estimations to be made. The following table outlines the possible situation in 2015 if scenarios D and E were implemented on a nation basis:

TABLE 8.2 RESULT OF IMPLEMENTING SCENARIOS D AND E NATIONALLY

distribution of N˚ of Eas N˚ of people % pop. additional N˚ of Water total cost of the WP within remaining with remaining remaining n˚ of Water Points per scenario in $US scenario the density of less without without Points by year until (@ $4,000 per Enumeration than 2 WP per access in access in 2015 2015 WP) Areas 1,000 in 2015 2015 2015 scenario D 1,144 targeted 0 2,512,189 21.1% $54,933,333 13,733 scenario E 19,000 1,583 targeted 0 1,196,339 10.1% $76,000,000

One important factor that is not taken into consideration in this calculation is the cost of keep the water points functioning. It is estimated that by 2015 there may be as many as 65,000 water points in Malawi and if each of these requires US$5 per year to operate and maintain, this amounts to $325,000 per year. Someone has to pay for this if the MDG is going to be achieved, and the main question is who should this be? Perversely, providing too many new water points will create a larger problem of paying for maintenance costs in the future.

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 35 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 9 Summary of assumptions made in calculating the millennium development goal

When calculating the resources needed to achieve the MDG in this paper it has been necessary to make a number of assumptions. These assumptions have been based on the authors understanding of the water sector in Malawi and their interpretation of Malawian policy. It has been assumed that:

The data collection process has been accurate. (The double verification and monitoring processes adopted have to date shown that this is a reasonable assumption to make) All the people within a distance of 500m from an improved communal water point will have access to the water it produces. In practice this is known not to be the case in all circumstances as people living within a few metres of a water point can be excluded from its use on social and financial grounds. It is also know that some people will travel further than 500m to access safe water The water points are evenly distributed within an Enumeration Area. It is know that in some cases a village headman may have influenced the location of the water points so that they would all be clustered in one area. In such a case the Enumeration Area water point density would be high, where the actual levels of access would be low Safe water is provided by improved shallow wells, boreholes and rural piped water schemes All new water points installed after 2003 will remain functioning until 2015. This is a big assumption to make as it is known that the majority of the water points will not have a 12 year life expectancy. This aspect of reaching the MDG will be subject to further analysis at a later date All the existing water points that were working at the time of the survey will continue to work until 2015. This is a large assumption to make and is unlikely to happen with the current policy for water point maintenance All people living in an Enumeration Area with a water point density of greater than four water point per 1000 population are adequately served Every new water point costs $US4000. This figure may be reasonably accurate from the perspective of installing the hardware, but in practice the actual cost is likely to be greater as it allows for no management, administrative or overhead costs When calculating water point need, the number of people using each water point is similar to the following

Range of population Number of water point unserved allocated 0 to 25 0 26 to 375 1 376 to 625 2 626 to 875 3 876 to 1,125 4 1,126 to 1,375 5 Every additional 250 1

The surveyed area is a representative sample of the whole of Malawi’s rural population The population figures and expected growth rates of 3.4 % and 1.9% are reasonably accurate

36 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 10 Conclusion

10.1 The development of more reflective macro indicators for the water sector

Developing and using water point density profiles showing water point density before 1998, current water point density and functioning water point density is an effective method of gaining a better understanding of the water sector. They enable the:

Equity of resource distribution to be assessed. By inference this is a proxy indicator for the level of ‘control’ and the quality of management of resource allocation within water sector Effectiveness at which resources are targeted at the poor Comparison of the amounts of resources different areas have received Assessment of the effectiveness of the water point maintenance systems in an area Assessment of the need for new facilities in an area

The profiles provide a useful management information system which can enable decision makers to make a more informed judgement regarding the allocation of resources and programme design. There is already some evidence of this with one international NGO in Malawi deciding to extend its work into Lilongwe West where there is poor access, poor equity and a high need, rather than move to Mzimba where the levels of equity and access are high and the need to a large extent have been met. This decision was based on evidence provided by the Lilongwe West and Mzimba profiles.

The profiles can also guide the type of work that is needed in a district or area. In poorer served areas like Lilongwe West the work should focus primarily on increasing the number of water points. In a district like Mulanje with its poor record for sustaining water points, the work should concentrate on developing better community based maintenance systems, as opposed to installing new water points.

The profiles are also a good starting point for further research, for example why is the distribution of water facilities particularly poor in an area like TA Pemba? Why are water points more sustainable in Mzimba South than they are in Mulanje? The lessons drawn from this research could feed into best-practice guidelines or policy decisions.

When considering specific indicators for the Millennium Development Goal the density profile for functional water points gives a very clear reflection on the state of the countries water supply facilities. Dividing the Enumeration Areas into different levels of water point density provides a useful tool that should, if applied lead to more equitable resource allocation.

If a single figure is required, the percentage of the population served by a functional water point density of four per 1000 population or less, is possibly the most useful.

The indicators developed can be used for any size of population and are applicable at Enumeration Area, Traditional Authority, district, regional and national levels.

10.2 Achieving the millennium development goal in Malawi

The results of the analysis show that the Millennium Development Goal is achievable in Malawi by 2015. Even if the level of investment in the water sector fell to 30% of the average investment over the last four years, it will still be possible to half the proportion of people unserved with safe water by 2015.

Calculating half the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 and measuring the progress towards the MDG is a more complicated process than first envisaged. Terms such as ‘access’ and ‘safe’ are variables that are hard to define and are therefore open to manipulation in order to prove a point either one way or another.

The key priority in Malawi is not an increase in the amount of money for additional new water points, but rather to increase the capacity of the sector to prioritise its work and to effectively target the unserved. To achieve Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 37 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 this, all the stakeholders within the sector need to work in a more co-ordinated manner and to adopt the objective of helping the Government of Malawi achieve the MDG. To do this they need to support the Ministry of Water Development in operating an effective management information system which allows the progress towards the MDG to be monitored. All stakeholders should be prepared to work in the areas that are underserved.

In a time when demand is growing from a wide range of stakeholders for greater investment within the water sector in the developing world, the analysis of the work carried out in Malawi shows that the problem is not with the actual amounts invested, but rather with where and how it is invested. The figure of US$77 million on new water supplies over the past five years within a country as small as Malawi does not seem insignificant. Does Malawi buck the trend or is it that investments are difficult to track and often obscured by weak financial tracking systems? When this figure is considered against the fact that 40% of water points are not working, is the water sector currently a good value for money investment?

The work has shown that unless a country has accurate information regarding the proportion of water points functioning in 2000, the MDG will prove to be very difficult, if not impossible to calculate. The survey in Malawi has allowed accurate data to be gathered for 2003, but the actual proportion of water points functioning in 2000 is an unknown quantity. In the case of Malawi, the margin of error created by this three year gap is tolerable and allowances will have to be made in future MDG calculations to allow for this error . However, if a country does not gain accurate records until say 2007, the margin of error will be great and confidence that any subsequent calculation are correct, lower. Any future claims by a countries that they have reached the MDG when they do not have accurate baseline information on the condition of the water supplies in 2000 must be treated with caution.

38 Halving the number of proportion without access to safe water by 2015 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003 11 Future direction of work in Malawi

Work on data collection is continuing and it is expected by mid 2004 that over 40% of Malawi’s rural population will have been surveyed. The Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA) has provided invaluable support to date and the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) are supporting the next stage of the process. This next stage is aimed at information dissemination and developing the capacity of the Ministry of Water Development to manage the data collection process and to analyse the resulting database. With this capacity the MOWD should be in an ideal position to start actively managing and guiding the work of all organisations active within the water sector.

The authors are planning to produce another report containing a more detailed analysis of the survey’s growing database. At this stage it is believed that it will be possible to do the following:

Obtain a figure for the average life expectancy of a handpump in Malawi by comparing graphs of annual investments against annual breakdown rates Compare sustainability performance against different variables eg implementer, location, and technology Compare the unserved areas with other poverty indicators such as literacy and infant mortality rates Calculate the effect on the MDG if all the water points were functioning Calculate investments with regard to source of funds Compare various implementation approaches ie drill, drop and depart, with / without community based management training with regard to longer term sustainability Develop a system which will allow cost benefit analysis between rehabilitation of existing schemes against provision of alternative sources

Halving the proportion of people without access to safe water by 2015 39 A Malawian perspective, Part 2 - September 2003