Abstract:The Water Poverty Index ͑WPI͒ was created as an interdisciplinary indicator to assess water stress and scarcity, linking physical estimates of water availability with the socioeconomic drivers of poverty. This index has found great relevance in policy making as an effective water management tool, particularly in resources allocation and prioritization processes. Two conceptual weaknesses exist in the current index: ͑1͒ inadequate technique to combine available data and ͑2͒ poor statistical properties of the resulting composite. The purpose of this paper is to propose a suitable methodology to assess water poverty that overcomes these weaknesses. To this end, a number of combinations to create the WPI have been considered, based on indicators selection criteria, simple aggregation functions and multivariate analysis. The approach adopted has been designed for universal application at local scale. To exemplify the utilization of each alternative method, they have been piloted and implemented in the Turkana District ͑Kenya͒ as a case study. The paper concludes that the weighted multiplicative function is the most appropriate aggregation method for estimation of water poverty. It is least eclipsing and ambiguous free function, and it does not allow compensability among different variables of the index.

No abstract

No abstract

Inadequate provision of water-related services in developing countries continues to undermine strategies for poverty alleviation. The root lies in the inability of policy makers to tackle resource development in a holistic and integrated manner. This requires a multi-faceted approach to combine physical estimates of water availability with the socio-economic drivers of poverty. It is with this in mind that the Water Poverty Index (WPI) was created. However, water resources are dynamic, and the linkages between water scarcity and poverty incorporate complex cause-effect relationships. Water poverty should thus be addressed in a more systemic way. This would allow a comprehensive understanding of the crosscutting nature of water issues and impacts. In this paper, a system approach has been adopted to develop a structured framework for a multi-dimensional evaluation of water poverty in basins. It is an attempt to assess the diverse, interacting components of catchment processes, societal pressures, and policy actions. An enhanced Water Poverty Index (eWPI) has been developed and is proposed in this study. To exemplify the utilisation of the index, and to test its applicability and validity, eWPI has been piloted in a Peruvian watershed as initial case study. Results highlight the likely utility of the tool to identify areas for improvement, and ultimately guide appropriate action towards better service delivery and sustainable management of water resources.

Water and sanitation improvements together with hygiene (WASH) are central to health. However, progress in ensuring access to these basic services remains inadequate, particularly in the rural developing world. To remedy this appalling situation, decision-makers need reliable data on which to base planning, targeting and prioritization. However, the challenges of collecting such data and producing consistent evidence are diverse. To influence policy, data have to be easily and meaningfully interpreted. In addition, the evaluation framework needs to capture the complexity inherent in the delivery of rural services. And with limited resources, the neediest must be prioritized. In this paper we compare three different monitoring and evaluation approaches: health impact indicators, standard indicators of the World Health Organization (WHO)/United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP), and one multidimensional, WASH-focused indicator. From a policy-making perspective, the likely utility of the outcomes produced by each approach is discussed. The epidemiological study produces misleading results, which do not help draw relevant conclusions. JMP indicators provide reasonable quality basic estimates of coverage across different contexts, but are inappropriate to build up a complete picture of such context. The index approach takes into account a broader view of service level, and proves useful as a policy tool to guide action towards improved service delivery.