Next Article in Journal
A Multi-Stakeholder Delphi Study to Determine Key Space Management Components for Elderly Facilities in China
Next Article in Special Issue
Urban Food Systems Strategies: A Promising Tool for Implementing the SDGs in Practice
Previous Article in Journal
Objectives for Stakeholder Engagement in Global Environmental Assessments
Article Menu
Issue 9 (September) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessCommentary
Sustainability 2017, 9(9), 1572;

Managing the ‘Monitoring Imperative’ in the Context of SDG Target 6.3 on Water Quality and Wastewater

Eawag, Swiss Federal Institute for Aquatic Science and Technology, CH-8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH) Zürich, IBP, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), ENAC, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
Received: 30 June 2017 / Revised: 21 August 2017 / Accepted: 29 August 2017 / Published: 4 September 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs))
Full-Text   |   PDF [3828 KB, uploaded 5 September 2017]   |  


Monitoring the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 6 for water and sanitation builds on monitoring frameworks that were developed for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), specifically the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP). Yet, since SDG 6 goes beyond the MDG focus on drinking water and sanitation, it also significantly expands monitoring and reporting responsibilities. The target to improve water quality (Target 6.3) calls for water quality monitoring and data reporting that are likely to pose a significant challenge to countries that lack an established monitoring program. At the same time, redundant burdens may be imposed on countries that already have established programs and report out water quality data to inter- or supranational agencies. In this context, there is a risk that the intention that water quality data should serve as a basis for evidence-based decision making will become subsidiary to the resource-intensive activities of data collection and management. Alternatively, policies could be designed based on historical experience with measures of proven effectiveness, prioritizing policies that could have multiple benefits. Policies could be implemented in parallel with the development of monitoring programs and conventional monitoring data could be complemented by information gained from sources such as remote sensing and unstructured data. View Full-Text
Keywords: FAIR principles; GEMI; GEMStat; open data; UN Water FAIR principles; GEMI; GEMStat; open data; UN Water

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Hering, J.G. Managing the ‘Monitoring Imperative’ in the Context of SDG Target 6.3 on Water Quality and Wastewater. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1572.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Sustainability EISSN 2071-1050 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top