The Influence of the Human Rights to Water and Sanitation Normative Content in Measuring the Level of Service

Human Rights to Water and Sanitation (HRWS) have been consolidated as relevant frameworks to measure different levels of services. It is essential to move forward with specific initiatives that interpret the content of these human rights and operationalize them through specific metrics. However, some critical issues emerge in attempting this. Different approaches are proposed in this article to tackle this challenge: (1) utilizing a participatory technique to discuss the relative importance of the normative criteria to define water and sanitation services, (2) defining a short list of key indicators to measure the different dimensions of HRWS, and (3) assessing the impact of different weighting systems in the constructing an aggregated index, which has been proposed as a useful tool to monitor water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) from a rights perspective. Two municipalities (in Mozambique and Nicaragua) were selected as initial case studies. The results suggest that there is a common understanding among the experts about prioritization of the HRWS criteria. Differences in the relative importance given to the HRWS criteria can be explained due to the particularities of the local context. Further, the research suggests that expert opinions may be partially conditioned by targets and indicators proposed at the international level. Although the influence of weighting techniques on aggregated measures and their utilization in the decision-making process are limited, this methodology has a great potential for adapting specific WASH metrics to different regional, national, and/or local contexts taking into account the HRWS normative content.

[1]  Bindu N. Lohani,et al.  Water Quality Index for Chao Phraya River , 1984 .

[2]  Donald G. Hodges,et al.  Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: a case study of Pohorje, Slovenia. , 2016 .

[3]  Selim Jahan,et al.  Human development report 2015: work for human development , 2015 .

[4]  Caroline A Sullivan,et al.  The Water Poverty Index: development and application at the community scale , 2003 .

[5]  Antonio Embid Irujo The Right to Water , 2007 .

[6]  Michael Freudenberg,et al.  Composite Indicators of Country Performance: A Critical Assessment , 2003 .

[7]  A. Pérez-Foguet,et al.  Analyzing Water Poverty in Basins , 2011 .

[8]  Agustí Pérez Foguet,et al.  Improved method to calculate a water poverty index at local scale , 2010 .

[9]  C. Sullivan Calculating a Water Poverty Index , 2002 .

[10]  Dinis Juízo,et al.  Performance evaluation of River Basin Organizations to implement integrated water resources management using composite indexes , 2012 .

[11]  Óscar Flores Baquero,et al.  Reporting progress on the human right to water and sanitation through JMP and GLAAS , 2015 .

[12]  Giuseppe Munda,et al.  Choosing Aggregation Rules for Composite Indicators , 2012 .

[13]  P. van der Zaag,et al.  Assessing the usefulness of the water poverty index by applying it to a special case: Can one be water poor with high levels of access? , 2009 .

[14]  E. Chan,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Approach for Assessment of Urban Renewal Proposals , 2008 .

[15]  Agustí Pérez-Foguet,et al.  Water-sanitation-hygiene mapping: an improved approach for data collection at local level. , 2013, The Science of the total environment.

[16]  I. Contreras,et al.  Constructing a composite indicator with multiplicative aggregation under the objective of ranking alternatives , 2013, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[17]  E. Feitelson,et al.  Water poverty: towards a meaningful indicator , 2002 .

[18]  Stefano Tarantola,et al.  Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide , 2005 .

[19]  Kirti Peniwati,et al.  Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[20]  J. Duke,et al.  Identifying public preferences for land preservation using the analytic hierarchy process , 2002 .

[21]  O. Flores Baquero,et al.  Measuring disparities in access to water based on the normative content of the human right , 2016 .

[22]  J Gallego-Ayala,et al.  Assessing the performance of urban water utilities in Mozambique using a water utility performance index , 2014 .

[23]  A. Saltelli,et al.  Expert Panel Opinion and Global Sensitivity Analysis for Composite Indicators , 2008 .

[24]  Multidimensional Analysis of Water Poverty in MENA Region: An Empirical Comparison with Physical Indicators , 2014 .

[25]  Stephen W. Gundry,et al.  Accounting for water quality in monitoring access to safe drinking-water as part of the Millennium Development Goals: lessons from five countries. , 2012, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[26]  J. Bartram,et al.  The human right to sanitation , 2017 .

[27]  M. Qureshi,et al.  Application of the analytic hierarchy process to riparian revegetation policy options , 2003, Small-scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy.

[28]  Unravelling the Linkages Between Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Rural Poverty: The WASH Poverty Index , 2013, Water Resources Management.

[29]  Youngwha Kee,et al.  An Analysis of the Relative Importance of Components in Measuring Community Wellbeing: Perspectives of Citizens, Public Officials, and Experts , 2014, Social Indicators Research.

[30]  J. A. Gómez-Limón,et al.  Identification of Public Objectives Related to Agricultural Sector Support , 2004 .

[31]  Agustí Pérez-Foguet,et al.  Monitoring access to water in rural areas based on the human right to water framework: a local level case study in Nicaragua , 2013 .

[32]  F. Booysen An Overview and Evaluation of Composite Indices of Development , 2002 .

[33]  Trends in Rural Water Supply: Towards a Service Delivery Approach , 2013 .

[34]  J. Gallego-Ayala,et al.  Integrating Stakeholders’ Preferences into Water Resources Management Planning in the Incomati River Basin , 2014, Water Resources Management.

[35]  Giuseppe Munda,et al.  Non-Compensatory Composite Indicators for Ranking Countries : A Defensible Setting , 2006 .

[36]  A. Pérez-Foguet,et al.  Quality and year-round availability of water delivered by improved water points in rural Tanzania: effects on coverage , 2012 .

[37]  B. Bryan,et al.  Quantifying and Exploring Strategic Regional Priorities for Managing Natural Capital and Ecosystem Services Given Multiple Stakeholder Perspectives , 2010, Ecosystems.

[38]  M. Langford A Poverty of Rights: Six Ways to Fix the MDGs , 2010 .

[39]  Union européenne,et al.  Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide , 2008 .

[40]  J. A. Gómez-Limón,et al.  Empirical evaluation of agricultural sustainability using composite indicators. , 2010 .

[41]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[42]  M. Kjellén,et al.  Water, sanitation and hygiene and indigenous peoples: a review of the literature , 2014 .

[43]  T. Saaty How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[44]  Stefan Hajkowicz,et al.  Multi-attributed environmental index construction , 2006 .

[45]  F. González‐Gómez,et al.  Public choice of urban water service management: a multi-criteria approach , 2013 .

[46]  M. Porter,et al.  National environmental performance: an empirical analysis of policy results and determinants , 2005, Environment and Development Economics.

[47]  Keisuke Hanaki,et al.  Assessment of stakeholders’ preferences towards sustainable sanitation scenarios , 2013 .

[48]  François Molle,et al.  Water poverty indicators: conceptual problems and policy issues , 2003 .

[49]  A. K. Dikshit,et al.  Development of composite sustainability performance index for steel industry , 2007 .

[50]  B. W. Ang,et al.  Weighting and Aggregation in Composite Indicator Construction: a Multiplicative Optimization Approach , 2010 .

[51]  S. Cairncross,et al.  What role for local government in sanitation promotion? Lessons from Tanzania , 2014 .

[52]  Danny I. Cho,et al.  Simplifying the Water Poverty Index , 2010 .