This article contributes to a growing conversation about the role of numbers in promoting gendered agendas in potentially contradictory ways. Drawing from interviews with gender advisors—the professionals tasked with mainstreaming gender in development projects—in an East African country, I begin from the paradox that gender advisors articulate a strong preference for qualitative data to best capture the lives of the women they aim to assist while voicing a need for quantitative metrics. I demonstrate that (women) gender advisors come to imagine metrics as expeditious bureaucratic tools able to inspire cooperation from otherwise reluctant (men) coworkers. I argue that development organizations are gendered in ways—acutely seen in how advisors struggle, are sidelined, and attempt to advance their goals with numbers—that lead to the utility of valuing quantitative metrics over qualitative ones. I establish two theoretical contributions: (1) Gendered organizations theory is essential to understanding the adoption and globalization of performance metrics, and (2) in an age of evidence-based decision making, the utility of quantified data to garner resources is heightened, rewarding those who adopt quantified knowledge production. I coin the term “the paradox of quantified utility” to describe how these material advantages encourage even skeptics to value quantitative metrics.

Introduction Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 aims to coordinate international efforts toward “clean water and sanitation.” However, water contaminated with pathogenic bacteria or thermotolerant coliforms (TTC) will not achieve the SDG target of clean water in the lives of people around the world. The aim of this study is to assess the water quality parameters of basic water services in Amhara and Afar regions of Ethiopia as well as the role and importance of local managerial committees in ensuring basic water functionality. Methods This mixed methods research, conducted in January-June 2019, sampled 22 districts from food-insecure areas in the Amhara and Afar regions of Ethiopia. From the 22 districts, which represent nearly one third of all districts in each region, 111 water services classified as “basic” were randomly selected. For each selected water service, research included: water quality sample testing, visual observation of water services, interviews and focus group discussions with the associated water managerial committee members. Descriptive statistics frequency, percent, mean, median, standard deviations, normal tables, cross-tables and graphs are used to present the data. Results Although the international water standard for thermotolerant coliform (TTC) levels is 0 CFU/100ml, in our sample of 111 water services, the maximum TTC counts were 71 CFU/100 ml and the mean was 4 CFU/100 ml. Thermotolerant coliform counts were above the permissible standard values for nearly 40% (n = 111) of the basic water services. TTC was detected in 44 (39.64%) (n = 111) basic water services. Of these, 38 (34.23%) were operationally functional while 6 (5.41%) were not functional. Approximately one third of the basic water services sampled, deemed “functional” by international standards, do not provide potable water due to thermotolerant coliform (TTC) levels. Conclusion Our findings from the Amhara and Afar regions of Ethiopia demonstrate that water quality parameters are not currently considered in classifying basic water services. This suggests that international efforts to address SDG 6 should incorporate water quality as a key parameter to better track international progress toward “clean water and sanitation” efforts. We discuss two potential pathways for stronger inclusion of water quality parameters in international definitions: (1) to mandate water quality within “functional” and “non-functional” definitions or (2) to add a ladder rung titled “safe basic water services” to the international drinking water ladder. Our findings from Ethiopia suggest that additional research should be undertaken in development contexts to assess whether or not “functional” basic water services provide safe drinking water to users.

No abstract

Form No. 836 R5 ST2629 1fY91 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any kgal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, rcwmmendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document.