1. 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.

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

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

7. 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

8. 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.

9. 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.
% safely treated wastewater
CONTAINMENT
EMPTYING
TRANSPORTATION

10. Framework outputs (6.2.1)
Typical output…Latin American country

11. 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

12. Thank you! b.e.evans@leeds.ac.uk andy.peal@ntlworld.com