Crossfire: 'Measures of sanitation coverage for the MDGs are unreliable, only raising a false sense of achievement'

I am really glad to be given the opportunity to discuss this important issue with you and pleased that we are keeping the profile of sanitation in the public eye and high on the development agenda. First of all I would like to acknowledge that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) do provide easily understood targets that we can all work towards achieving, but I am concerned that for water and sanitation they can be misunderstood and misused. Since 2000 progress towards the water and sanitation target has been monitored by the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP). As you know, I am a strong supporter of the JMP; having an international system by which progress can be assessed is invaluable. The problem is that in making the system robust and universal we may have had to make too many compromises. This has resulted in two separate problems: 1) inaccurate reporting (usually over-reporting); and 2) over attention to the hardware aspects of sanitation. On the first point, let me use a couple of illustrations: The JMP Report 2006 states that in Pakistan improved sanitation coverage in urban areas currently stands at 92 per cent. This seems very high to me and I am sure anyone with any knowledge of conditions in the urban areas of Pakistan would agree with me. Meanwhile, rural areas of Sri Lanka are reported as having 89 per cent coverage; this seems extremely unlikely, especially following the dreadful tsunami event of December 2004. The officials in these governments may be very pleased with how the report looks; the millions of slum-dwellers in Karachi Crossfire: 'Measures of sanitation coverage for the MDGs are unreliable, only raising a false sense of achievement' KRISTOF BOSTOEN and BARBARA EVANS