Water, sanitation, hygiene and rural poverty: issues of sector monitoring and the role of aggregated indicators

Water Policy ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 1018-1045 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Giné Garriga ◽  
A. Pérez Foguet
Keyword(s):  
Rural Poverty ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Health Impact ◽  
Service Level ◽  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
World Health ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Index Approach ◽  
Joint Monitoring ◽  
Health Organization

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.

scholarly journals Operationalisation of consensual One Health roadmaps in countries for improved IHR capacities and health security

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (7) ◽  
pp. e005275
Author(s):  
Stephane de la Rocque ◽  
Guillaume Belot ◽  
Kaylee Marie Myhre Errecaborde ◽  
Rajesh Sreedharan ◽  
Artem Skrypnyk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Human Health ◽  
One Health ◽  
Animal Health ◽  
International Health ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
World Health ◽  
Health Security ◽  
Human Animal ◽  
Health Organization

The COVID-19 pandemic is a devastating reminder that mitigating the threat of emerging zoonotic outbreaks relies on our collective capacity to work across human health, animal health and environment sectors. Despite the critical need for shared approaches, collaborative benchmarks in the International Health Regulations (IHR) Monitoring and Evaluation Framework and more specifically the Joint External Evaluation (JEE) often reveal low levels of performance in collaborative technical areas (TAs), thus identifying a real need to work on the human–animal–environment interface to improve health security. The National Bridging Workshops (NBWs) proposed jointly by the World Organisation of Animal Health and World Health Organization (WHO) provide opportunity for national human health, animal health, environment and other relevant sectors in countries to explore the efficiency and gaps in their coordination for the management of zoonotic diseases. The results, gathered in a prioritised roadmap, support the operationalisation of the recommendations made during JEE for TAs where a multisectoral One Health approach is beneficial. For those collaborative TAs (12 out of 19 in the JEE), more than two-thirds of the recommendations can be implemented through one or multiple activities jointly agreed during NBW. Interestingly, when associated with the WHO Benchmark Tool for IHR, it appears that NBW activities are often associated with lower level of performance than anticipated during the JEE missions, revealing that countries often overestimate their capacities at the human–animal–environment interface. Deeper, more focused and more widely shared discussions between professionals highlight the need for concrete foundations of multisectoral coordination to meet goals for One Health and improved global health security through IHR.

scholarly journals The Early Stage of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Tunisia, France, and Germany: A Systematic Mapping Review of the Different National Strategies

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (16) ◽  
pp. 8622
Author(s):  
Khouloud Laffet ◽  
Fatma Haboubi ◽  
Noomene Elkadri ◽  
Rita Georges Georges Nohra ◽  
Monique Rothan-Tondeur
Keyword(s):  
Early Stage ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
National Level ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
World Health ◽  
Systematic Mapping ◽  
Mapping Review ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Systematic Mapping Review

The multitude of national strategies used against the COVID-19 pandemic makes it necessary to review and synthesize them in order to identify potential gaps and shortcomings, and to help prioritize future control efforts. This systematic mapping review is aimed at identifying the coronavirus pandemic management strategies adopted by France, Tunisia, and Germany during the early stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. A set of government websites in addition to the PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify scientific articles and institutional documents related to the national strategies of the three countries up until July 2020. The references included were mapped and narratively synthesized based on the pillars of the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework of the Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan defined by the World Health Organization. Of the 2765 records screened, 65 documents were included in the study. The analysis of these documents showed that Germany was the first country to implement mass screening of cases and that France was the first country to implement measures to impose general containment at the national level. It also showed that Tunisia was the only country to have imposed the confinement of passengers on repatriation flights in dedicated containment centers and at the expense of the state.

scholarly journals Sodium Levels of Processed Meat in Australia: Supermarket Survey Data from 2010 to 2017

Nutrients ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 1686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emalie Sparks ◽  
Clare Farrand ◽  
Joseph Santos ◽  
Briar McKenzie ◽  
Kathy Trieu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sodium Intake ◽  
Meat Products ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Sodium Content ◽  
World Health ◽  
Processed Meat ◽  
High Sodium ◽  
Processed Meats ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Health Dialogue

High sodium intake increases blood pressure and consequently increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases. In Australia, the best estimate of sodium intake is 3840 mg sodium/day, almost double the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline (2000 mg/day), and processed meats contribute approximately 10% of daily sodium intake to the diet. This study assessed the median sodium levels of 2510 processed meat products, including bacon and sausages, available in major Australian supermarkets in 2010, 2013, 2015 and 2017, and assessed changes over time. The median sodium content of processed meats in 2017 was 775 mg/100 g (interquartile range (IQR) 483–1080). There was an 11% reduction in the median sodium level of processed meats for which targets were set under the government’s Food and Health Dialogue (p < 0.001). This includes bacon, ham/cured meat products, sliced luncheon meat and meat with pastry categories. There was no change in processed meats without a target (median difference 6%, p = 0.450). The new targets proposed by the current government’s Healthy Food Partnership capture a larger proportion of products than the Food and Health Dialogue (66% compared to 35%) and a lower proportion of products are at or below the target (35% compared to 54%). These results demonstrate that voluntary government targets can drive nutrient reformulation. Future efforts will require strong government leadership and robust monitoring and evaluation systems.

scholarly journals Establishing Sustainable Development Goal Baselines for Household Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Services

Water ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 1711 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Bain ◽  
Richard Johnston ◽  
Francesco Mitis ◽  
Christie Chatterley ◽  
Tom Slaymaker
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Drinking Water ◽  
World Health ◽  
Household Surveys ◽  
Sustainable Development Goal ◽  
Development Goal ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Sanitation And Hygiene ◽  
Joint Monitoring ◽  
Health Organization

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

scholarly journals Typhoid Conjugate Vaccines and Enteric Fever Control: Where to Next?

2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S185-S190
Author(s):  
A Duncan Steele ◽  
Megan E Carey ◽  
Supriya Kumar ◽  
Calman A MacLennan ◽  
Lyou-Fu Ma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Impact ◽  
World Health ◽  
Surveillance Systems ◽  
Conjugate Vaccines ◽  
Immunization Strategies ◽  
Global Demand ◽  
Health Organization ◽  
Global Agenda ◽  
Potential Use

Abstract After the unprecedented success and acceleration of the global agenda towards typhoid fever control with a strong World Health Organization recommendation and the approval of funding from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance (Gavi), for the use of a new typhoid conjugate vaccine (TCV), we should turn our minds to the challenges that remain ahead. Despite the evidence showing the safety and clinical efficacy of TCV in endemic populations in developing countries, we should remain vigilant and explore hurdles for the full public health impact of TCV, including vaccine supply for the potential global demand, immunization strategies to optimize the effectiveness and long-term protection provided by the vaccines, potential use of TCV in outbreak settings, and scenarios for addressing chronic carriers. Finally, challenges face endemic countries with poor surveillance systems concerning awareness of the need for TCV and the extent of the issue across their populations, and how to target immunization strategies appropriately.

scholarly journals Water and Sanitation in Urban America, 2017–2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 110 (10) ◽  
pp. 1567-1572
Author(s):  
Drew Capone ◽  
Oliver Cumming ◽  
Dennis Nichols ◽  
Joe Brown
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Monitoring Program ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Health ◽  
Water And Sanitation ◽  
Urban America ◽  
Joint Monitoring ◽  
Health Organization

Objectives. To estimate the population lacking at least basic water and sanitation access in the urban United States. Methods. We compared national estimates of water and sanitation access from the World Health Organization/United Nations Children’s Fund Joint Monitoring Program with estimates from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development on homelessness and the American Community Survey on household water and sanitation facilities. Results. We estimated that at least 930 000 persons in US cities lacked sustained access to at least basic sanitation and 610 000 to at least basic water access, as defined by the United Nations. Conclusions. After accounting for those experiencing homelessness and substandard housing, our estimate of people lacking at least basic water equaled current estimates (n = 610 000)—without considering water quality—and greatly exceeded estimates of sanitation access (n = 28 000). Public Health Implications. Methods to estimate water and sanitation access in the United States should include people experiencing homelessness and other low-income groups, and specific policies are needed to reduce disparities in urban sanitation. We recommend similar estimation efforts for other high-income countries currently reported as having near universal sanitation access.

scholarly journals Developing a multisectoral National Action Plan for Health Security (NAPHS) to implement the International Health Regulations (IHR 2005) in Tanzania

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. e000600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janneth M Mghamba ◽  
Ambrose O Talisuna ◽  
Ludy Suryantoro ◽  
Grace Elizabeth Saguti ◽  
Martin Muita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Action Plan ◽  
International Health ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Framework ◽  
World Health ◽  
International Health Regulations ◽  
Member States ◽  
Health Security ◽  
National Action Plan ◽  
Health Regulations

The Ebola outbreak in West Africa precipitated a renewed momentum to ensure global health security through the expedited and full implementation of the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005) in all WHO member states. The updated IHR (2005) Monitoring and Evaluation Framework was shared with Member States in 2015 with one mandatory component, that is, States Parties annual reporting to the World Health Assembly (WHA) on compliance and three voluntary components: Joint External Evaluation (JEE), After Action Reviews and Simulation Exercises. In February 2016, Tanzania, was the first country globally to volunteer to do a JEE and the first to use the recommendations for priority actions from the JEE to develop a National Action Plan for Health Security (NAPHS) by February 2017. The JEE demonstrated that within the majority of the 47 indicators within the 19 technical areas, Tanzania had either ‘limited capacity’ or ‘developed capacity’. None had ‘sustainable capacity’. With JEE recommendations for priority actions, recommendations from other relevant assessments and complementary objectives, Tanzania developed the NAPHS through a nationwide consultative and participatory process. The 5-year cost estimate came out to approximately US$86.6 million (22 million for prevent, 50 million for detect, 4.8 million for respond and 9.2 million for other IHR hazards and points of entry). However, with the inclusion of vaccines for zoonotic diseases in animals increases the cost sevenfold. The importance of strong country ownership and committed leadership were identified as instrumental for the development of operationally focused NAPHS that are aligned with broader national plans across multiple sectors. Key lessons learnt by Tanzania can help guide and encourage other countries to translate their JEE priority actions into a realistic costed NAPHS for funding and implementation for IHR (2005).

Health Impact of Community Based Water Treatment Systems in Honduras

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 24-29
Author(s):  
Jeffery Deal
Keyword(s):  
Drinking Water ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Health Impact ◽  
World Health ◽  
Waterborne Diseases ◽  
Safe Drinking Water ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Development Goal ◽  
Basic Sanitation ◽  
Health Organization

The United Nations Millennium Development Goal Number 7 states that it wants to "Halve, by 2015 the proportion of the population (global) without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation" (United Nations 2010). Most waterborne diseases result in diarrhea, which continues to be a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. According to World Health Organization data, if existing technologies were widely used, ten percent of the worldwide burden of disease would be removed by the water supply, sanitation, hygiene, and management of water resources. This estimate makes water related diseases arguably the most manageable set of health problems affecting humans (Prüss-Üstün et al. 2008).

scholarly journals A conceptual framework to evaluate the outcomes and impacts of water safety plans

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard J. Gelting ◽  
Kristin Delea ◽  
Elizabeth Medlin
Keyword(s):  
Drinking Water ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
World Health ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Water Safety ◽  
Common Basis ◽  
Drinking Water Safety ◽  
Health Organization

A Water Safety Plan (WSP) is a preventive, risk management approach to ensure drinking water safety. The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines place WSPs within a larger 'framework for safe drinking-water' that links WSPs to health, creating an implicit expectation that implementation of WSPs will safeguard health in areas with acceptable drinking water quality. However, many intervening factors can come between implementation of an individual WSP and ultimate health outcomes. Evaluating the impacts of a WSP, therefore, requires a much broader analysis than simply looking at health improvements. Until recently, little guidance for the monitoring and evaluation of WSPs existed. Drawing examples from existing WSPs in various regions, this paper outlines a conceptual framework for conducting an overall evaluation of the various outcomes and impacts of a WSP. This framework can provide a common basis for implementers to objectively monitor and evaluate the range of outcomes and impacts from WSPs, as well as a common understanding of the time frames within which those results may occur. As implementers understand the various outcomes and impacts of WSPs beyond health, a strong evidence base for the effectiveness of WSPs will develop, further enabling the scaling up of WSP implementation and provision of better quality water.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document