Congratulations!

Source: Department for International Development (2009). Factsheet – Water and Sanitation. UK

The diagram shows that the population in African and Asian regions have no access to improved sanitation.

Improved sanitation usually means passing through a hierarchy of pit latrines, with pour flush latrines and septic tank latrines the plausible options. In urban areas the picture is more mixed. For high-density urban areas sewerage systems have obvious advantages.

Source: UNDP (2006). Human Development Report 2006, p. 113. NY

School pit latrines (Zambia, June 2009) Source: Torsten Krekeler (BGR)	School vault latrines (Namibia, June 2008) Source: Torsten Krekeler (BGR)

Congratulations!

The 'water footprint' of a country is defined as the volume of water needed for the production of goods and services consumed by the inhabitants of the country. The water footprint of a country can be calculated with either the top-down approach or bottom-up approach. In the top-down approach, one calculates the water footprint as the sum of water use in the country, plus gross virtual water import into the country, minus gross virtual water export. In the bottom-up approach, we aggregate the individual water footprints of the inhabitants of a country to get the total water footprint of a country. Individual water footprints are calculated by multiplying all consumed goods and services with their respective virtual water content.

Result:
Based on the top-down approach, the global average water footprint is found to be 1240 m³/yr/cap. There are large differences between countries. In the USA the average water footprint is 2500 m3/cap/yr. In China the average water footprint is 700 m³/cap/yr.

Average national water footprint per capita (m3/cap/yr). Green means that the nations' water footprint is equal to or smaller than the global average. Countries with red have a water footprint beyond the global average. Period: 1997-2001.

Source: http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/WaterFootprints

Congratulations!

Source: UNDP (2006): Human Development Report 2006, p. 62. NY

It is difficult to capture real public spending on water and sanitation partly because of the fragmentation of financing across ministries, partly because of decentralization and partly because donor financing is often off-budget. However, public spending in the sector as a whole typically represents less than 0.5% of GDP, falling to 0.1% in Pakistan and Zambia (see figure). Within the sector expenditure on sanitation typically falls well short of that for water. Sanitation investment averages about 12%-15% of the total in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. Overall spending is low not just relative to national income, but also to other areas of social spending, such as public health. When measured against military spending, the gulf widens to very large proportions. For example, India spends 8 times more of its national wealth on military budgets than on water and sanitation. Pakistan spends 47 times more. In sub-Saharan Africa low average incomes clearly constrain public spending capacity.

Source: UNDP (2006): Human Development Report 2006, p. 62. NY

Congratulations!

The overall public and private investment needs for improved water supply and sanitation and water resources management are considerable. However, at the country level, meeting such investment challenges is highly feasible and within the reach of most nations.

• Global estimates indicate that an additional annual investment of USD 11.3 billion is required to meet the MDG on water supply and sanitation. But, the total accrued economic benefits of reaching the MDG is USD 84 billion – a seven-fold return.
  For example, the health-sector related costs avoided reach USD 7.3 billion a year, and the annual global value of adult working days gained as a result of less illness would be almost USD 750 million per year. The biggest value is found in the he total convenience time saving for water collection due to better access, which amounts to USD 64 billion. However the combination of improved water supply, sanitation and hygiene indicates the biggest economic impact.
• Economic benefits ranging from USD 3 to USD 34 per USD 1 invested (depending on the region and technologies applied) would be gained in the health, individual and household, and agricultural and industrial sectors if the water and sanitation MDG targets are achieved. The results confirm that the benefits far outweigh the costs.

Source: Stockholm International Water Institute, SIWI (2004-2005): "Making Water a Part of Economic Development: The Economic Benefits of Improved Water Management and Services". Stockholm. Sweden

Congratulations!

According to Population Action International, based upon the UN medium population projections of 1998, more than 2.8 billion people in 48 countries will face water stress or water scarcity conditions by 2025. An area is experiencing water stress when annual water supplies drop below 1700 m3 per person. Water scarcity means that the annual water supply is below 1000 m3 per person. This graphic shows which African nations are expected to be experiencing water stress, and which are expected to be facing water scarcity, by the year 2025. It also includes a graphic which shows that as the world's population continues to grow, a higher proportion of the population will be affected by water stress and water scarcity.

Source: http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/freshwater_stress_and_scarcity_in_africa_by_2025