SDG targets 6.2 and 6.3 – A draft monitoring framework Barbara Evans on behalf of Andy Peal, Lars Schoebitz, Luca Di Mario and Kate Medlicott Good morning My name is Andy Peal. I am a WHO consultant …..working within the Task Team focusing on Sustainable Development Goal Targets 6.2 and 6.3.

Overview SDG targets 6.2 and 6.3 and their respective indicators Sanitation service chain Rationale and main aspects for monitoring A proposed draft monitoring approach and framework In this presentation I will discuss Targets 6.2 and 6.3, …..the indicators and definitions within both …which look at sanitation, hygiene and water quality…...with the latter I will focus on treatment of wastewater. I will look at the rationale and main aspects for monitoring And discuss a proposed approach for monitoring using a framework

World Health Organization 15 May, 2018 Components of target 6.3 Water quality PART A PART B Municipal THIS SLIDE SERVES AS AN INTRODUCTION OR “GLUE” FOR THIS PRESENTATION AND THE PRESENTATION THAT FOLLOWS Three sources of wastewater pollution are considered – diffuse agricultural sources, domestic wastewater (including both onsite and sewered services) and industrial wastewater (which includes point source agriculture) For the purposes of global monitoring, it is considered unfeasible to monitor the diffuse sources of agricultural pollution – therefore only their effect on receiving water quality is monitored. Consequently, task teams therefore looked at measurability for the three areas shown here, …...domestic wastewater, industrial wastewater and water quality. However, an important linkages need to be made between the three….especially that Water Quality Monitoring should verify progress on wastewater management. Water quality monitoring verifies progress on wastewater management Wastewater monitoring establishes causes of poor water quality

Target 6.2 Sanitation and hygiene Indicator 6.2.1: Percentage of population using safely managed sanitation services Definition: Population using an improved sanitation facility, which is: not shared with other households and where excreta is safely disposed in situ or (transported) and treated offsite. Looking first at 6.2 What does the term ‘safely managed sanitation’ mean? The agreed definition is shown here… population using an improved sanitation facility which is not shared with other households and where excreta is safely disposed insitu or treated offsite

SDG monitoring needs to go beyond monitoring usage of household toilets to address safe management of excreta along the sanitation chain.... SAFE MANAGEMENT So monitoring will go beyond usage …as per MDG definitions...to address safe management along the sanitation chain. HOUSEHOLD TOILET END-USE/DISPOSAL

....and capture particular issues of different sanitation systems.... …looking at both offsite...sewerd systems ...and onsite systems too. SEWERED/OFFSITE SYSTEMS ONSITE SYSTEMS

Basic sanitation + treatment OR safe disposal insitu What does the term safely managed mean in terms of the improved sanitation facilities…toilets connected to piped sewers, septic tanks and pit latrines of onsite sanitation? For the population using sewer connections…it is the proportion for which excreta is transported to treatment plants and is treated While for the population using onsite systems…..such as septic tanks and pit latrines …. it is the proportion for which excreta can either be…..stored, emptied, transported and treated….. Or stored in the container until safe…. The sources for this data could include household surveys for the first % population column and municipal authorities, regulators, service providers for the % treated column Basic sanitation + treatment OR safe disposal insitu ACCESS TO TOILETS SAFE DISPOSAL INSITU TREATMENT

but, looking at treatment only is not sufficient ... but, looking at treatment only is not sufficient. Through unsafe management, there are losses along the sanitation chain.

6.3.1 - % safely treated wastewater 6.2.1 – % popn using safely managed sanitation So we have to expand monitoring framework to assess these losses along the sanitation chain For example losses during transport, emptying and containment. Some of this data is already collected and available, where it isn’t, expanded household surveys and surveys of the concerned service providers would be required This is the complete framework…which starts from usage of household toilets and accounts for losses at each step on the sanitation chain….and which we can use in any country to estimate the proportion of population using ‘safely managed sanitation’ And we can also use these data to calculate the percentage of treated municipal wastewater. 6.3.1 - % safely treated wastewater CONTAINMENT EMPTYING TRANSPORTATION

Framework outputs (6.2.1) Typical output…Latin American country

Conclusions Builds on existing MDG monitoring (JMP) Allows flexibility for decision makers on how to transition from unsafe to safe depending on the context, priorities and resources. Outputs provide a simple graphical overview of the sources and fates (both safe and unsafe) of excreta There is no indicator for safe reuse – but disposal/reuse categories for ‘safely treated’ captures ‘safe reuse‘. Graphoical overview

Thank you! b.e.evans@leeds.ac.uk andy.peal@ntlworld.com medlicottk@who.int alabaster.unhabitat@unog.ch