Improving Monitoring and Water Point Functionality in Rural Ethiopia
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Study Context
2.2. Sampling
2.3. Data Collection
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Functionality of Water Points in Rural Ethiopia: Findings from the Community Survey
3.1.1. Characteristics of Communities
3.1.2. Water Point Functionality and Management
3.1.3. Perceived Areas for Improvement Needed in Water Management Systems
3.2. Functionality of Water Points in Rural Ethiopia: Findings from the WaSH Committee Survey
3.2.1. Characteristics of WaSH Committees
3.2.2. Water Points, Management, and Functionality
3.2.3. Factors Associated with the Functionality of Water Points
4. Discussion
4.1. Factors Associated with the Functionality of Water Points
4.2. Droughts, Extreme Weather Events, and Vulnerability of Water Points
4.3. Comparing Findings in Intervention and Control Area
4.4. Opportunities to Improve Water Point Functionality Monitoring
4.5. Closing the Knowledge to Action Gap
4.6. Methodological Discussions and Limitations
5. Conclusions and Policy Recommendations
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bartram, J.; Lewis, K.; Lenton, R.; Wright, A. Focusing on improved water and sanitation for health. Lancet 2005, 365, 810–812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bartram, J.; Cairncross, S. Hygiene, sanitation, and water: Forgotten foundations of health. PLoS Med. 2010, 7, e1000367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bartram, J.; Godfrey, S. Drinking-water supply. In Routledge Handbook of Water and Health; Bartram, J., Baum, R., Coclanis, P.A., Gute, D.M., Kay, D., Mc Fayden, S., Pond, K., Robertson, W., Rouse, M.J., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2015; pp. 191–202. ISBN 978-1138910072. [Google Scholar]
- Black, R.E.; Morris, S.S.; Bryce, J. Where and why are 10 million children dying every year? Lancet 2003, 361, 2226–2234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clasen, T.F.; Alexander, K.T.; Sinclair, D.; Boisson, S.; Peletz, R.; Chang, H.H.; Majorin, F.; Cairncross, S. Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhea. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2015, 10, 1–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Esrey, S.A.; Potash, J.B.; Roberts, L.; Shiff, C. Effects of improved water supply and sanitation on ascariasis, diarrhoea, dracunculiasis, hookworm infection, schistosomiasis, and trachoma. Bull. WHO 1991, 69, 609–621. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Fewtrell, L.; Kaufmann, R.B.; Kay, D.; Enanoria, W.; Haller, L.; Colford, J.M., Jr. Water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions to reduce diarrhoea in less developed countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Inf. Dis. 2005, 5, 42–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UN General Assembly, Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 21 October 2015. A/RES/70/1. Available online: http://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html (accessed on 18 September 2018).
- WHO; UNICEF. Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene—2015 Update and SDG Baselines 2015; United Nations Children’s Fund: Geneva, Switzerland; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Growth and Transformation Plan II (GTP II) (2015/16–2019/20); National Planning Commission: Adis Abeba, Ethiopia, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Anthonj, C.; Fleming, L.; Godfrey, S.; Ambelu, A.; Bevan, J.; Cronk, R.; Bartram, J. Health risk perceptions are associated with domestic use of basic water and sanitation services—Evidence from rural Ethiopia. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 2112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, E.L.; Schwab, K.J. Deficiencies in drinking water distribution systems in developing countries. J. Water Health 2005, 3, 109–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cronk, R.; Bartram, J. Factors Influencing water system functionality in Nigeria and Tanzania: A regression and Bayesian network analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 11336–11345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Carter, R.C.; Ross, I. Beyond ‘functionality’ of handpump-supplied rural water services in developing countries. Waterlines 2016, 35, 94–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexander, K.T.; Tesfaye, Y.; Dreibelbis, R.; Abaire, B.; Freeman, M.C. Governance and functionality of community water schemes in rural Ethiopia. Int. J. Public Health 2015, 60, 977–986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Foster, T. Predictors of sustainability for community-managed handpumps in sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Uganda. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47, 12037–12046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Whittington, D.; Davis, J.; Prokopy, L.; Komives, K.; Thorsten, R.; Lukacs, H.; Wakeman, W. How well is the demand-driven, community management model for rural water supply systems doing? Evidence from Bolivia, Peru and Ghana. Water Policy 2009, 11, 696–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foster, T.; Shantz, A.; Lala, S.; Willetts, J. Factors associated with operational sustainability of rural water supplies in Cambodia. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 2018, 4, 1577–1588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, M.B.; Shields, K.F.; Chan, T.U.; Christenson, E.; Cronk, R.D.; Leker, H.; Samani, D.; Apoya, P.; Lutz, A.; Bartram, J. Understanding handpump sustainability: Determinants of rural water source functionality in the Greater Afram Plains region of Ghana. Water Resour. Res. 2015, 51, 8431–8449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Behnke, N.; Klug, T.; Cronk, R.; Shields, K.F.; Lee, K.; Kelly, E.; Allgood, G.; Bartram, J. Resource mobilization for community-managed rural water systems: Evidence from Ghana, Kenya, and Zambia. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 156, 437–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marks, S.J.; Davis, J. Does user participation lead to sense of ownership for rural water systems? Evidence from Kenya. World Dev. 2012, 40, 1569–1576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butterworth, J. Getting to the Heart of Climate Resilient WASH. 2018. Available online: https://www.ircwash.org/blog/getting-heart-climate-resilient-wash (accessed on 18 September 2018).
- Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy (MoWIE). Climate Resilient Water Safety Strategic Framework; Ministry of Water, Irrigation and Energy: Adis Abeba, Ethiopia, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Godfrey, S.; van der Velden, M.; Muianga, A.; Xavier, A.; Downs, K.; Morgan, C.; Bartram, J. Sustainability check: Five-year annual sustainability audits of the water supply and open defecation free status in the “One Million Initiative”, Mozambique. Environ. Sci. Eng. 2014, 4, 471–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Godfrey, S.; Hailemichael, G. Three-phase approach to improve deep groundwater supply availability in the Elidar district of Afar region of Ethiopia. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2016, 6, 414–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Godfrey, S.; Hailmicheal, G. Life cycle cost analysis of water supply infrastructure affected by low rainfall in Ethiopia. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 2017, 7, 601–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Josephs-Afoko, D.; Godfrey, S.; Campos, L. Assessing the performance and robustness of the UNICEF model for groundwater exploration in Ethiopia through application of the analytic hierarchy process, logistic regression and artificial neural networks. Water SA J. 2018, 44, 365–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giné-Garriga, R.; Jiménez-Fernández de Palencia, A.; Pérez-Foguet, A. Water-sanitation-hygiene mapping: An improved approach for data collection at local level. Sci. Total Environ. 2013, 463–464, 700–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jiménez Fernández de Palencia, A.; Pérez-Foguet, A. Quality and year-round availability of water delivered by improved water points in rural Tanzania: Effects on coverage. Water Policy 2012, 14, 509–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kelly, E.; Shields, K.F.; Cronk, R.; Lee, K.; Behnke, N.; Klug, T.; Bartram, J. Seasonality, water use and community management of water systems in rural settings: Qualitative evidence from Ghana, Kenya, and Zambia. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 628–629, 715–721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hutchings, P.; Chan, M.Y.; Cuadrado, L.; Ezbakhe, F.; Mesa, B.; Tamekawa, C.; Franceys, R.A. Systematic review of success factors in the community management of rural water supplies over the past 30 years. Water Policy 2015, 17, 963–983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butterworth, J. Rural Utilities for Water Supply in Ethiopia. 2018. Available online: https://www.ircwash.org/blog/rural-utilities-water-supply-ethiopia (accessed on 18 September 2018).
- Klug, T.; Cronk, R.; Shields, K.F.; Bartram, J. A categorization of water system breakdowns: Evidence from Liberia, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Uganda. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 619, 1126–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Klug, T.; Shields, K.F.; Cronk, R.; Kelly, E.; Behnke, N.; Lee, K.; Bartram, J. Water system hardware and management rehabilitation: Qualitative evidence from Ghana, Kenya, and Zambia. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2017, 220, 531–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hering, J. Implementation science for the environment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 5555–5560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Klenk, N.L.; Meehan, K. Transdisciplinary sustainability research beyond engagement models: Towards adventures in relevance. Environ. Sci. Policy 2017, 78, 27–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anthonj, C.; Diekkrüger, B.; Borgemeister, C.; Kistemann, T. Health risk perceptions and local knowledge of water-related infectious disease exposure among Kenyan wetland communities. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2018, 222, 34–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nganyanyuka, K.; Martinez, J.; Lungo, J.; Georgiadou, Y. If citizens protest, do water providers listen? Water woes in a Tanzanian town. Environ. Urban. 2018, 30, 613–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pearce, J. Real Time Monitoring of Boreholes Enables Critical Services to be Sustained during the Drought in Somali Region. 2017. Available online: https://www.ircwash.org/blog/real-time-monitoring-boreholes-enables-critical-services-be-sustained-during-drought-somali (accessed on 18 September 2018).
Community Characteristics | n | % |
---|---|---|
Region | ||
Amhara | 23 | 30.67 |
Oromia | 9 | 12.00 |
SNNPR * | 29 | 38.67 |
Tigray | 14 | 18.67 |
Total number of households | ||
N | 74 | |
Mean | 842 | |
Median | 220 | |
Total population | ||
N | 74 | |
Mean | 2611 | |
Median | 1150 | |
Area was affected by natural disaster in past 1 year | ||
Drought | 26 | 60.47 |
Excessive rain | 17 | 39.53 |
Flood | 19 | 44.19 |
Crop failure | 30 | 69.77 |
Crop pests/diseases | 32 | 74.42 |
Disease outbreak in animals | 34 | 79.07 |
A farmers’ cooperation is present | 35 | 47.30 |
Year of community-led total sanitation (CLTS) | ||
N | 50 | |
Mean | 2007 | |
Median | 2007 | |
Awareness of meaning of ODF ** community | 58 | 78.38 |
Community has received a certificate as ODF | 29 | 39.00 |
Number of Water Points in Communities (n = 74). | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variable | n | Min | Max | Mean | Median |
Total improved | 74 | 0 | 40 | 4 | 2 |
Total functional | 74 | 0 | 25 | 3 | 1 |
Total unimproved | 74 | 0 | 15 | 2 | 2 |
Characteristics of Community | n | % |
---|---|---|
Total functional water points | 206 | 65.19 |
WaSH committee is currently operational | 52 | 88.14 |
WaSH committee manages the water point | 59 | 79.73 |
Problems with water point solved quickly | 16 | 21.62 |
Perceived quality of management | ||
Very good | 18 | 24.32 |
Reasonable | 39 | 52.70 |
Bad | 17 | 22.97 |
Changes in the community due to new water point | ||
More time for other economic activities (n = 3) | 3 | 40.00 |
Better health (n = 3) | 3 | 60.00 |
Less diarrhea (n = 3) | 3 | 60.00 |
More children go to school (n = 3) | 3 | 60.00 |
Characteristics of WaSH Committees | Control Areas | Intervention Areas | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
n | % | n | % | |
WaSH Committee exists | 31 | 88.57 | 40 | 100.00 |
WaSHCo operational/working at present | 29 | 93.55 | 39 | 97.50 |
WaSHCo responsible for other water points | 13 | 41.94 | 19 | 47.50 |
Number of water points WaSHCo manages | ||||
N | 13 | 19 | ||
Mean | 3 | 3 | ||
Median | 1 | 2 |
Control Areas | Intervention Areas | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Characteristics of Water Point | n | % | n | % |
Type of public water point mostly used in community | ||||
Piped into dwelling | 0 | 0.00 | 1 | 2.50 |
Piped into yard/plot/compound | 1 | 2.86 | 0 | 0.00 |
Public tap/standpipe | 6 | 17.14 | 5 | 12.50 |
Tube well/borehole | 8 | 22.86 | 12 | 30.00 |
Protected well | 11 | 31.43 | 12 | 30.00 |
Protected spring | 8 | 22.86 | 6 | 15.00 |
Unprotected spring | 0 | 0.00 | 2 | 5.00 |
River/lake/pond/stream/dam | 1 | 2.86 | 2 | 5.00 |
Depth of improved water point (most used public) [meters] | ||||
N | 23 | 29 | ||
Mean | 19 | 50 | ||
Range [min–max] | 1–70 | 1–282 | ||
Current state of the water point | ||||
Working | 26 | 74.29 | 34 | 85.00 |
Working partially (with problems) | 6 | 17.14 | 3 | 7.50 |
Not working | 3 | 8.57 | 3 | 7.50 |
Reason why water point only works partially | ||||
Water point is dry at the moment | 2 | 22.22 | 2 | 33.33 |
One spare part is missing | 5 | 55.56 | 3 | 50.00 |
Requires a big rehabilitation | 5 | 55.56 | 2 | 33.33 |
The rehabilitation is in process | 1 | 11.11 | 1 | 16.67 |
The pump was stolen | 2 | 22.22 | 0 | 0.00 |
Abandoned | 2 | 22.22 | 1 | 16.67 |
Water point has a pump | 20 | 57.14 | 27 | 67.50 |
Type of pump | ||||
Afridev | 11 | 55.00 | 19 | 70.37 |
India Mark (Im-I&Ii) | 5 | 25.00 | 3 | 11.11 |
Direct action hand pump | 1 | 5.00 | 1 | 3.70 |
Rope pump | 0 | 0.00 | 1 | 3.70 |
Submersible electrical pump | 1 | 5.00 | 2 | 7.41 |
Other hand pump | 2 | 10.00 | 1 | 3.70 |
Time to repair pump last time it broke down [days] | ||||
N | 20 | 27 | ||
Mean | 25 | 35 | ||
Median | 4 | 3 | ||
Perceived water quality at this water point | ||||
Very Bad | 2 | 5.71 | 3 | 7.50 |
Bad | 6 | 17.14 | 6 | 15.00 |
Good | 18 | 51.43 | 24 | 60.00 |
Very Good | 8 | 22.86 | 7 | 17.50 |
Do Not Know | 1 | 2.86 | 0 | 0.00 |
Water point dries up | 7 | 20.00 | 9 | 22.50 |
Control Areas (n = 43) | Intervention Areas (n = 30) | |
---|---|---|
WaSH committee | 75 | 85 |
Woreda water office | 60 | 41 |
Regional water office | 0 | 5 |
Control Areas | Intervention Areas | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Seasonal Payment of Water | N | % | N | % |
Payments collection in dry season | ||||
There is no payment | 16 | 45.71 | 16 | 40.00 |
Per Jeri-can of 20 L | 4 | 11.43 | 8 | 20.00 |
Regularly per month | 10 | 28.57 | 9 | 22.50 |
Per break down of water point | 0 | 0.00 | 1 | 2.50 |
Payments collection in rainy season | ||||
There is no payment | 20 | 57.14 | 18 | 45.00 |
Per Jeri-can of 20 L | 4 | 11.43 | 6 | 15.00 |
Regularly per month | 7 | 20.00 | 9 | 22.50 |
Per break down of water point | 0 | 0.00 | 1 | 2.50 |
Bivariate Analysis; Outcome is Functionality | Unadjusted Model | Adjusted Model | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CI 90% | CI 90% | |||||||
OR | Low | Up | p-Value | OR | Low | Up | p-Value | |
Explanatory variable | ||||||||
Characteristics of water points | ||||||||
Number of private improved water points | 1.24 | 0.24 | 6.38 | 0.801 | 0.98 | 0.18 | 5.28 | 0.980 |
Number of public improved water points | 0.90 | 0.74 | 1.08 | 0.253 | 0.95 | 0.78 | 1.17 | 0.632 |
Depth of the improved water point [m] | 1.01 | 0.99 | 1.04 | 0.316 | 1.01 | 0.99 | 1.04 | 0.391 |
Water point ever dries up | 0.33 | 0.10 | 1.13 | 0.077 * | 0.28 | 0.08 | 1.00 | 0.050 |
Water point has a pump | Omitted | 2.16 | 0.68 | 6.90 | 0.192 | |||
Indian mark pump | 3.55 | 0.92 | 13.74 | 0.067 | 3.03 | 0.76 | 11.99 | 0.115 |
Management of water points | ||||||||
Year in which water point was constructed | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.443 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.527 |
Water point constructed by local micro-enterprise | 1.10 | 0.34 | 3.60 | 0.875 | 0.93 | 0.28 | 3.15 | 0.911 |
Water point constructed by Woreda water office | 0.50 | 0.16 | 1.53 | 0.224 | 0.62 | 0.19 | 1.98 | 0.417 |
Responsibility for maintenance of pump | ||||||||
WaSHCo/caretakers | 2.83 | 0.55 | 14.69 | 0.216 | 1.57 | 0.24 | 10.50 | 0.641 |
Year in which WaSHCo was created | 0.83 | 0.69 | 1.02 | 0.072 | 0.89 | 0.73 | 1.09 | 0.261 |
Woreda water office maintenance of the pump | 0.27 | 0.05 | 1.52 | 0.138 | 0.40 | 0.07 | 2.42 | 0.317 |
WaSHCo responsible for other water points | 0.81 | 0.27 | 2.45 | 0.705 | 0.88 | 0.27 | 2.80 | 0.823 |
Number of males on the WaSHCo | 1.13 | 0.77 | 1.67 | 0.530 | 1.10 | 0.74 | 1.64 | 0.647 |
Number of females on the WaSHCo | 0.83 | 0.48 | 1.41 | 0.483 | 0.81 | 0.46 | 1.44 | 0.473 |
Maintenance/caregiver group for water point | 0.36 | 0.11 | 1.13 | 0.081 | 0.39 | 0.12 | 1.27 | 0.116 |
Number of times the WaSHCo met in past year | 1.03 | 0.89 | 1.19 | 0.693 | 1.04 | 0.85 | 1.29 | 0.687 |
Water payments collection in dry season | ||||||||
No water payment | 0.67 | 0.22 | 2.02 | 0.473 | 0.60 | 0.19 | 1.89 | 0.384 |
Payment per Jeri-can of 20 L | 1.40 | 0.27 | 7.14 | 0.686 | 1.17 | 0.22 | 6.15 | 0.852 |
Payment regularly per month | 0.73 | 0.22 | 2.45 | 0.615 | 0.97 | 0.26 | 3.54 | 0.958 |
Water payments collection in rainy season | ||||||||
No water payment | 1.00 | 0.33 | 3.01 | 1.000 | 0.95 | 0.30 | 2.99 | 0.926 |
Payment per Jeri-can of 20 L | 1.08 | 0.21 | 5.65 | 0.930 | 0.95 | 0.18 | 5.10 | 0.951 |
Payment regularly per month | 0.55 | 0.16 | 1.89 | 0.342 | 0.67 | 0.18 | 2.50 | 0.545 |
Activities related to water | ||||||||
Community orientation | 1.80 | 0.59 | 5.48 | 0.301 | 1.53 | 0.48 | 4.81 | 0.472 |
Identification of water point type to construct | 1.27 | 0.39 | 4.15 | 0.688 | 1.28 | 0.38 | 4.332 | 0.690 |
Identification of location for point construction | 0.66 | 0.21 | 2.10 | 0.480 | 0.81 | 0.24 | 2.762 | 0.740 |
Assessment of water source/technology options | 0.20 | 0.06 | 0.68 | 0.010 | 0.23 | 0.06 | 0.835 | 0.025 |
Community participation and involvement | 0.67 | 0.20 | 2.26 | 0.517 | 0.61 | 0.18 | 2.100 | 0.430 |
Construction of water supply system | 0.77 | 0.18 | 3.23 | 0.715 | 0.72 | 0.17 | 3.116 | 0.661 |
Rehabilitation of water supply system | 0.57 | 0.13 | 2.52 | 0.461 | 0.58 | 0.13 | 2.608 | 0.474 |
WaSHCo establishment and training | 0.87 | 0.26 | 2.88 | 0.819 | 1.05 | 0.29 | 3.805 | 0.941 |
Water point/system abandoned/closed | 0.93 | 0.17 | 4.95 | 0.927 | 1.08 | 0.19 | 6.127 | 0.930 |
Transportation/collection of supply materials | 0.37 | 0.06 | 2.42 | 0.298 | 0.26 | 0.04 | 1.860 | 0.179 |
Celebration/inauguration of supply system | 0.25 | 0.012 | 4.31 | 0.343 | 0.24 | 0.01 | 4.149 | 0.323 |
Other activities | 0.67 | 0.16 | 2.87 | 0.586 | 0.65 | 0.15 | 2.859 | 0.567 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Anthonj, C.; Fleming, L.; Cronk, R.; Godfrey, S.; Ambelu, A.; Bevan, J.; Sozzi, E.; Bartram, J. Improving Monitoring and Water Point Functionality in Rural Ethiopia. Water 2018, 10, 1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10111591
Anthonj C, Fleming L, Cronk R, Godfrey S, Ambelu A, Bevan J, Sozzi E, Bartram J. Improving Monitoring and Water Point Functionality in Rural Ethiopia. Water. 2018; 10(11):1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10111591
Chicago/Turabian StyleAnthonj, Carmen, Lisa Fleming, Ryan Cronk, Samuel Godfrey, Argaw Ambelu, Jane Bevan, Emanuele Sozzi, and Jamie Bartram. 2018. "Improving Monitoring and Water Point Functionality in Rural Ethiopia" Water 10, no. 11: 1591. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10111591