Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'environment/water-and-sanitation-55/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/environment/water-and-sanitation-55/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'environment/water-and-sanitation-55/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/environment/water-and-sanitation-55/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]Code Contextif (Configure::read('debug')) {
trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);
} else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67d312f341fff-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67d312f341fff-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67d312f341fff-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25, 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Report%20No.%209%20of%202021_GWMR_English-061c19df1d9dff7.23091105.pdf">click here</a> to access&nbsp;the [inside]Report no 9 of 2021: Performance Audit of Ground Water Management and Regulation for the period 2013-18 (laid on the floor of the Parliament on 21 December, 2021)[/inside]. Kindly <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/CAG%20Press%20Release%20Groundwater%2021%20Dec%202021.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1UNMLzOUev1axQLA4c-0XyJ5BEYk8mN7NshA-OPmNWf2pmfPd8jvGnc80">click here</a> to access the&nbsp;press release by CAG dated 21 December, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access the key findings of [inside]NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019)[/inside].<br /> <br /> Kindly <a href="mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Report_584_final.pdf">click here</a> to access the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019).<br /> <br /> According to the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019):<br /> <br /> &bull; The major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 48.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 57.5 percent of the households in the urban areas had exclusive access to principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 87.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 90.9 percent of the households in the urban areas had sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the principal source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 58.2 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 80.7 percent of the households in the urban areas had drinking water facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 94.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 97.4 percent of the households in the urban areas used &lsquo;improved source of drinking water&rsquo;.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 51.4 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 72.0 percent of the households in the urban areas used improved source of drinking water located in the household premises which was sufficiently available throughout the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 56.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to bathroom.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to bathroom, about 48.4 percent in the rural areas and about 74.8 percent in the urban areas used bathroom attached to the dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 71.3 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to latrine. It may be noted that there may be respondent bias in the reporting of access to latrine as question on benefits received by the households from government schemes was asked prior to the question on access of households to latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; The major type of latrine used by the households was flush/pour-flush to septic tank in both rural and urban areas. About 50.9 percent of the households in rural areas and 48.9 percent of the households in urban areas used flush/pour-flush to septic tank type of latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 94.7 percent of the males and 95.7 percent of the females in the rural areas used latrine regularly while about 98.0 percent of the males and 98.1 percent of the females in the urban areas used latrine regularly.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 93.8 percent of the males and 94.6 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine while about 97.2 percent of both males and females in the urban areas regularly used improved latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 85.8 percent of the males and 86.4 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine which was for exclusive use of the household while the corresponding figure was about 82.4 percent for males and 84.7 percent for females in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 3.5 percent of the household members in the rural areas and about 1.7 percent of the household members in the urban areas never used latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households used latrine, about 4.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 2.1 percent of the households in the urban areas reported that water was not available in or around the latrine used.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 48.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 86.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had bathroom and latrine both within household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 96.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 63.8 percent of the households in the urban areas had own dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 96.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.5 percent of the households in the urban areas used the house for residential purpose only.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 89.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 56.4 percent of the households in the urban areas had independent house.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 76.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.0 percent of the households in the urban areas had the house of pucca structure.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, average floor area of the dwelling unit was about 46.6 sq. mtr. in the rural areas and about 46.1 sq. mtr. in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 93.9 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 99.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had electricity for domestic use.<br /> <br /> <br /> **page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the [inside]CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit of National Rural Drinking Water Programme (published on 7th August, 2018)[/inside] in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) was launched with the objective of providing adequate safe water for drinking, cooking and other domestic needs to every rural person on a sustainable basis. The 12th Plan aimed at providing all rural habitations, schools and anganwadis with safe drinking water by December, 2017. It also envisaged that at least 50 percent of the rural population will be provided piped water supply at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) within the household premises or at a distance of not more than 100 meters from their households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP also aimed to provide household connection to 35 percent of rural households. The NRDWP is being implemented in the states through its six components and through other focused schemes. During the 12th FYP period (2012-17), a total of Rs. 89,956 crore (Central share of Rs. 43,691 crore and state share of Rs. 46,265 crore) was provided for the Programme of which&nbsp; Rs. 81,168 crore was spent during this period.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were set for achievement by 2017 viz. (i) all rural habitations, Government schools and anganwadis to have access to safe drinking water; (ii) 50 per cent of rural population to be provided potable drinking water (55 lpcd) by piped water supply; and (iii) 35 per cent of rural households to be provided household connections.<br /> <br /> &bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by eight percent at 40 lpcd and 5.5 percent at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP was an important element in Government of India&rsquo;s commitment to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal Number 6 which relates to ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.&nbsp; The Ministry had informed (September 2017) that while its objective was to provide drinking water to every Indian household, it would require approximately Rs. 23,000 crore annually till 2030 (at present cost) to achieve this goal and given the present level of outlays, the SDG cannot be realized solely through NRDWP efforts.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Planning and Delivery Mechanism:</em> The planning and delivery framework established at the Centre and states deviated from the NRDWP guidelines. Twenty one states did not frame Water Security Plans and deficiencies were found in preparation and scrutiny of Annual Action Plans such as lack of stakeholder and community participation, non-inclusion of minimum service level of water in schemes and absence of approval of State Level Scheme Sanctioning Committee for schemes included in the plans. The apex level National Drinking Water and Sanitation Council set up to co-ordinate and ensure convergence remained largely dormant. The agencies vital for planning and execution of the Programme such as State Water and Sanitation Mission, State Technical Agency, Source Finding Committee and Block Resource Centres were either not set up or were not performing their assigned functions. These constraints both in terms of planning and delivery ultimately affected achievement of Programme goals and targets.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Fund Management: </em>The NRDWP is implemented as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme with cost being shared between the Central and State Governments. The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation&rsquo;s expectations that the states would be able to compensate for reduced Central allocation by increasing their own financial commitment to the scheme taking into account the increased devolution based on the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission was belied. Thus, the overall availability of funds for the Programme declined during the period 2013-14 to 2016-17. However, even the reduced allocations of funds remained unutilised. There were&nbsp; delays of over 15 months in release of Central share to nodal/ implementing agencies. There was also diversion of funds towards inadmissible items of expenditure and blocking of funds amounting to Rs. 662.61 crore with State Water and Sanitation Missions and work executing agencies.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Programme Implementation:</em> The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were to be achieved by end of 2017 as brought out above. This was attributable partly to deficiencies in implementation such as incomplete, abandoned and non-operational works, unproductive expenditure on equipment, non-functional sustainability structures and gaps in contract management that had a total financial implication of Rs. 2,212.44 crore.<br /> <br /> &bull; Only five percent of quality affected habitations had been provided with Community Water Purification Plants and there was slow progress in setting up such plants out of funds provided by the NITI Aayog. Sustainability plans were either not prepared/ implemented or not included in the Annual Action Plans. There was inadequate focus on surface water based schemes and a large number of schemes&nbsp; (98 percent) including piped water schemes continued to be based on ground water resources. Operation and Maintenance plans were either not prepared in most of the states or had deficiencies leading to schemes becoming non-functional. As a result, incidence of slip-back habitations has persisted.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Lastly, lack of required number of labs at states/ district/ sub-divisional level resulted shortfall in prescribed quality tests of water sources and supply thereby compromising the objective of providing safe drinking water to the rural population.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Monitoring and Evaluation: </em>Data in the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) of the Programme lacked consistency and accuracy due to insufficient authentication and validation controls. The expert teams for inspection viz. Vigilance and Monitoring Committees to monitor and review implementation of NRDWP were either not established or were not functioning in the planned manner. Social audit of the programme to measure beneficiary level satisfaction was not conducted. Hence, the overall monitoring and oversight framework lacked effectiveness and there was inadequate community involvement in this exercise.<br /> &nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> Rural sanitation did not feature on the investment horizon during the first five plan periods as reflected in its negligible funding share. However, it received prominence from the Sixth Plan (1980-85) onwards amid the launch of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation decade in 1980, says the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf">51st Report of Standing Committee</a> on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin. India&rsquo;s first nationwide programme for rural sanitation, the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP), was launched in 1986, in the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) with the objective of improving the quality of life of rural people and to provide privacy and dignity to women. The programme provided large subsidy for construction of sanitary latrines for BPL households.<br /> <br /> The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), was launched with effect from 1st April, 1999 following a &lsquo;community led&rsquo; and &lsquo;people centered&rsquo; approach. The TSC moved away from the principle of state-wise allocation to a &ldquo;demand-driven&rdquo; approach. The programme laid emphasis on Information, Education and Communication (IEC) for generation of effective demand for sanitation facilities. It also laid emphasis on school sanitation and hygiene education for bringing about attitudinal and behavioral changes for adoption of hygienic practices from an early age.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> In order to encourage the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) to take up sanitation promotion, the incentive award scheme of Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP) was launched in 2005. The award was given to those PRIs which attained 100 percent open defecation free environment. This award publicized the sanitation programme significantly across the country.<br /> &nbsp;<br /> Encouraged by the initial success of NGP, and looking into the need to upscale sanitation interventions, the TSC was revamped as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) in 2012, with the objective to accelerate the sanitation coverage in rural areas so as to comprehensively cover rural population through renewed strategies and saturation approach and also to transform rural India into Nirmal Bharat.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> In order to significantly upscale the programme, and bring the nation&#39;s focus on the issue of sanitation, the Government of India had launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) viz. SMB (G) on 2nd October, 2014 to accelerate efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in the country by 2nd October, 2019. With the launch of SBM (G), the construction of toilets in schools and anganwadis has been mandated to the Ministry of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Women and Child Development respectively for greater focus.<br /> <br /> Under the SBM, the focus is on behavior change. Community based collective behavior change has been mentioned as the preferred approach, although the states are free to choose the approach best suited to them. Focus is also on creation of complete open defecation free (ODF) villages, rather than only on construction of individual toilets.<br /> <br /> The key findings of the [inside]51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018)[/inside], are as&nbsp; follows <em>(please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access)</em>:<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) was started in 2014 in rural areas of the country. The Cabinet approved the total estimated outlay of Rs. 1,34,386.61 crore for SBM (G). The financial burden of SBM (G) between the Centre and states is in the ratio of 60:40, with the exception of special category states where the share is 90:10. From 2014-15 to 2017-18, the central allocation made for SBM (G) has been Rs. 36,836.27 crore, of which Rs. 36,825.48 crore has been released to the states. For the financial year 2018-2019, an allocation of Rs. 30,343 crore has been made, with Rs. 7,509.82 crore already released to the states as of May 2018. The remaining Rs. 22,833.18 crore is planned to be released during the course of the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the time of launch of the SBM (G) on 2nd October, 2014, the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20in%20India%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage in India as on 24th May 2018">sanitation coverage in the country</a> was 38.7 percent. This has increased to 84.13 percent as on 24th May, 2018.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20across%20states%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage across states as on 24th May 2018">Sanitation coverage as on 24th May</a>, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; 386 districts, 3,578 blocks, 1,62,688 gram panchayats and 3,66,774 villages have been declared open defecation free (ODF) as on 24th May, 2018. As on 24th May, 2018, 17 states/ UTs namely Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Mizoram, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Meghalaya, Dadar &amp; Nagar Haveli, Daman &amp; Diu, Maharashtra &amp; Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands have been declared ODF. There are around 3 crore households pending as on 1st April, 2018, which are likely to be benefitted from this scheme in 2018-19.<br /> <br /> &bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20ODF%20villages%20across%20states.jpg" title="Proportion of ODF villages across states">proportion of villages</a>, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent).<br /> <br /> &bull; The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) through an Independent Verification Agency has done the National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey 2017-2018.&nbsp; In that survey, 92,040 households in 6,136 villages across all states were covered. The main findings of survey are: 1. Nearly 77 percent households in rural India have access to toilets <em>[the corresponding figure as per the SBM-G Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) at the midpoint of the survey period was 76 percent]</em>; 2. Roughly 93.4 percent of the households having access to a toilet use regularly; 3. Nearly 95.6 percent ODF verified villages confirmed ODF; 4. About 70 percent of the villages found to have minimal litter and stagnant water; 5. Roughly 70 percent villages found to have minimal stagnant water.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to the MDWS, the number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Household%20toilets%20constructed%20in%20India%20in%20lakhs.jpg" title="Household toilets constructed in India">household toilets constructed</a> was 58 lakhs in 2014-15, 126 lakhs in 2015-16, 218 lakhs in 2016-17 and 294 lakhs in 2017-18.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/State%20and%20UT%20wise%20IHHLs%20constructed%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="State and UT wise IHHLs constructed under SBM_Gramin">individual household latrines (IHHLs) </a>constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 7.2 crore. Most IHHL construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in Uttar Pradesh (around 98 lakhs), followed by Rajasthan (76.4 lakhs) and Madhya Pradesh (56.2 lakhs). As per the Cabinet Note, 9.72 crore IHHLs <em>(8.84 crore eligible for incentive and 0.88 crore non-eligible for APLs)</em> to be constructed under SBM (G), says the report.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20persons%20using%20toilets%20for%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202017-18.jpg" title="Proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets in 2017-18">National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey</a> (2017-18), the proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets was the lowest in Tamil Nadu (71.4 percent), followed by Puducherry (78.4 percent), Odisha (85.4 percent), Uttar Pradesh (87.9 percent) and Jharkhand (92.2 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.2 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20households%20having%20access%20to%20water%20for%20use%20in%20toilets%20out%20of%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202016_1.jpg" title="Proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets in 2016">Swachhata Status Report 2016</a> of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), the proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets was the lowest in Odisha (77.5 percent), followed by Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh (both 84.0 percent), Madhya Pradesh (89.2 percent), West Bengal (89.8 percent) and Bihar (90.0 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.9 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Community%20Sanitary%20Complexes.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Community Sanitary Complexes (CSC)</a> constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 10,002. Most number of CSCs construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in West Bengal (2,063), followed by Arunachal Pradesh (1,266), Jammu &amp; Kashmir (1,238), Himachal Pradesh (1,081) and Andhra Pradesh (616).<br /> <br /> &bull; The share of Central expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G) was Rs. 3,748.8 lakhs in 2014-15, Rs. 4,311.49 lakhs in 2015-16, Rs. 4,982.04 lakhs in 2016-17 and Rs. 7,484.69 lakhs in 2017-18. There is significant variation across the states in terms of Centre&#39;s share of expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G).&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Although the funds released under the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachh%20Bharat%20Kosh.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Swachh Bharat Kosh</a> of SBM (G) for Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands, Assam, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Odisha and Tripura was altogether Rs. 399.86 crore, the funds utilised as per the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) was Rs. 129.41 crore. It may be noted that the Swachh Bharat Kosh was set up in 2015 by the Ministry of Finance for channelizing the voluntary contribution from individuals and corporate sectors in response to the call given by Hon&#39;ble Prime Minister to achieve Swachh Bharat by 2nd October, 2019.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Unspent%20Balances%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="Unspent Balances under SBM_Gramin">Unspent balances</a> under the SBM (G) was Rs. -886.27 crore in 2015-16, Rs. -320.50 in 2016-17, Rs. 4,197.38 crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 9,890.84 crore in 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018)</em>. States like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances under the programme. As per the MDWS, the reasons for high unspent balance in some states under SBM (G) are: a. Inadequate capacity at grass root level; and b. Existence of revolving funds and leveraging other sources of credit. In its reply to a query by the Standing Committee, the MDWS has said that higher unspent balance in states automatically reduces their eligibility for further fund release in the subsequent year. Due to this specific modality and inbuilt provision in the SBM (G) guidelines, states observe better financial discipline. Strict monitoring methods are adopted to obtain the progress of each district on real time basis using the online monitoring system. Regular review meetings/ video conferences etc. are organized by the MDWS to discuss issues relating to implementation of the SBM (G) and utilization of funds&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; The Parliamentary Standing Committee has found out that during the year 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018) </em>there was huge unspent balance to the tune of Rs. 9,890.84 crore under the SBM (G). The Committee has observed that the problem of unspent balance is more prominent in certain states as compared to others. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report says that states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh Rs. 2,836.82 crore, in Bihar Rs. 2,764.62 crore, in Madhya Pradesh Rs. 866.68 crore, in Assam Rs. 606.30 crore, in Odisha Rs. 436.71 crore and in Andhra Pradesh Rs. 420.16 crore are lying unspent.<br /> <br /> &bull; The MDWS has claimed about 84 percent of sanitation coverage in the rural areas of India as on 24th May, 2018. However, contrary to the figures that was projected by the Ministry, the Parliamentary Standing Committee while examining the subject says that the sanitation coverage figures seemed to be more on &quot;paper&quot; but the actual progress at the ground level is very lethargic. Even a village with 100 percent household toilets cannot be declared ODF till all the inhabitants start using them, says the report. The main thrust of the government should be on the usage of toilets as mere building of toilets alone is not sufficient for the realization of actual vision of an ODF country.<br /> <br /> &bull; Much more is required to be done so as to bring in &quot;behavioural change&quot; in rural populace so as to attain the real motive behind the SBM (G), says the report. In the wake of this serious concern, the Standing Committee has recommended the MDWS to bring about a radical transformation in the &quot;behavioural&quot; aspects of the rural masses by inculcating in them a sense of hygiene and well-being through mass extensive awareness campaigns and other suitable mechanisms, so that the gap in the figures projected and the ground reality may be abridged for the betterment of the country.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Standing Committee has found that the performance of some of states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha in terms of sanitation is very poor. Appalled by the slackness of sanitation coverage in these states, the Committee enquired from the MDWS about the state of affairs. In response to that, the Ministry has informed that they are aware of it and have given special emphasis to the said states through various innovative measures. In this context, the Secretary of the MDWS candidly admitted before the Standing Committee about the dismal performance of bigger states and assured the Committee that the Government will take all necessary steps and will also provide extra budgetary resources to these states so as to improve the situation. The Parliamentary Standing Committee has observed that the efforts made by the government are not complete if the issue of awareness generation is left behind in this demand driven programme. The Committee has strongly recommended that the MDWS should pay more attention towards pace of sanitation in the low performing states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha on a war footing.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Committee is wary of the poor nature of construction and low quality of raw materials being used in the construction of toilets under SBM (G) as found by members themselves and through different feedbacks. The Committee has pressed upon the MDWS to ensure that the quality of raw materials used for construction of toilets under SBM (G) are of a good standard commensurate with the amount being spent as incentive to the beneficiaries without any compromise.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">A Rapid Survey on Swachhta Status was conducted by the NSSO during May-June 2015 alongside its regular 72nd Round (July 2014-June 2015) survey covering 3,788 villages and 2,907 urban blocks. The number of households surveyed was 73,176 in rural India and 41,538 in urban India.<br /> <br /> The survey aims to give a snapshot of the situation on the availability/ accessibility of toilets, solid waste and liquid waste management at sample village/ ward and household levels aggregated at state and country-levels.<br /> <br /> As per the report entitled [inside]Swachhta Status Report 2016[/inside], which has been prepared by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; Out of the 3788 villages surveyed, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose.<br /> <br /> &bull; From the 2,907 sample urban frame survey (UFS) blocks surveyed at all-India level, 42.0 percent wards were found to have community/ public toilets. At all India-level, 1.6 percent wards were found to be having the community /public toilets but not using them.<br /> <br /> &bull; In 54.9 percent of the villages having community toilets, cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the panchayat or on contract payment. In 17.0 percent villages, it was being done by the residents themselves. However, 22.6 percent villages were such where the community toilets were not being cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, cleaning of community/ public toilets was being done by the persons employed by the local municipal body in 73.1 percent wards having these toilets. 12.2 percent wards were such where the cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the residents&rsquo; welfare association. However, community/ public toilets in 8.6 percent wards were not being cleaned by anybody.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 36.8 percent wards in urban areas reported to have a proper liquid waste disposal system for community/ public toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 36.7 percent villages had pakki nali and 19.0 percent villages had katchi nali as drainage arrangement for waste water coming out of the rural households. 44.4 percent villages had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 56.4 percent wards reported to have sewer network for disposal of liquid waste.<br /> <br /> &bull; 78.1 percent wards reported to have a system of street cleaning.<br /> <br /> &bull; 64.2 percent wards were found to have a dumping place for solid waste. These solid waste dumping places were cleaned every day in case of 48.2 percent wards, on a weekly basis in case of 37.7 percent wards and on a monthly basis in case of 9.3 percent wards.&nbsp; However, 4.9 percent wards were such where the solid waste dumping place was not cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 50.5 percent of the households kept the garbage at a specified place outside their own house, 24.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the nearby agriculture field, 5.5 percent households kept it at the common place outside the house, 4.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the biogas plant or manure pit whereas 15.1 percent households threw it around the house.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 45.3 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, 88.8 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India for the households having sanitary toilet, percentage of persons using household/ community toilet was 95.6 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India for the households having sanitary toilet, the percentage of persons using household/ community/ public toilet was 98.7 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India, 42.5 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilet.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, 87.9 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 52.1 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 7.5 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 55.4 percent households contributed to open defecation. This percentage in urban areas was 8.9 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the [inside]Economic Survey 2015-16[/inside], Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>):<br /> <br /> &bull; The Census of India 2011 informs that around 70 percent of India&rsquo;s population (650 million) lives in rural and slum areas. It increases the possibility of exposure of the population to water-borne and vector-borne diseases<br /> <br /> &bull; Only 46.6 percent of households in India have access to drinking water within their premises. A far lower, 43.5 percent of households have access to tap water. Similarly, less than 50 percent households have latrine facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) is accelerating efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage and eliminate open defecation in India by 2 October 2019. It also aims to promote better hygiene amongst the population and improve cleanliness by initiating Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) projects in villages, towns and cities.<br /> <br /> &bull; The progress in sanitation has witnessed a spurt since the launch of the Swachh Bharat Mission. In its first year, i.e. from 2 October 2014 to 2 October 2015, 88 lakh toilets were constructed, against an expected outcome of 60 lakhs. More than 122 lakh toilets have already been constructed in rural areas so far under the mission. Sanitation coverage, which stood at 40.60 percent as per NSSO data, has risen to around 48.8 percent as on 31 December 2015.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme estimates, 61 percent of rural Indians defecate in the open in 2015, compared with only 32 per cent of rural people in sub-Saharan Africa. Even sanitation laggards perform better than India, with 17 percent rural open defecation in Afghanistan and 15 percent in Kenya.<br /> <br /> &bull; In order to improve availability of drinking water in rural areas, the National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) initiated a new project supported by the World Bank, the &lsquo;Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project&ndash;Low Income States&rsquo; with a total cost of Rs. 6000 crore. The project aims to provide safe, 24 x 7 piped drinking water supply to 7.8 million rural population in four low-income States--Assam, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand--that have the lowest piped water supply and sanitation facilities. As on 31 December 2015, the project has implemented 275 single and multi-village piped drinking water supply schemes through the decentralized delivery mechanism of empowered Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committees.<br /> <br /> **page**<br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the United Nations&#39; report entitled: [inside]Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014[/inside] (released in May 2014), (Please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Indian scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 92 million people in India and 112 million people in China without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 792 million people in India and 478 million people in China without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Globally, India continues to be the country with the highest number of people (597 million people) practicing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Despite having some of the highest numbers of open defecators, India (597 million people), Nigeria (39 million people) and Indonesia (54 million people) do not feature among those countries making the greatest strides in reducing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population practicing open defecation in India declined from 74 percent in 1990 to 63 percent in 2000 and further to 48 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in India rose from 18 percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2000 and further to 36 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in rural India was 25 percent whereas in urban India it was 60 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in India rose from 70 percent in 1990 to 81 percent in 2000 and further to 93 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in rural India was 91 percent whereas in urban India it was 97 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Global scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990, almost 2 billion people globally have gained access to improved sanitation, and 2.3 billion have gained access to drinking-water from improved sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Some 1.6 billion of these people have piped water connections in their homes or compounds.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; More than half of the global population lives in cities, and urban areas are still better supplied with improved water and sanitation than rural ones. But the gap is decreasing. In 1990, more than 76% people living in urban areas had access to improved sanitation, as opposed to only 28% in rural ones. By 2012, 80% urban dwellers and 47% rural ones had access to better sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 1990, 95% people in urban areas could drink improved water, compared with 62% people in rural ones. By 2012, 96% people living in towns and 82% of those in rural areas had access to improved water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2012, 116 countries had met the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target for drinking water, 77 had met the MDG target for sanitation and 56 countries had met both targets. MDG 7.C aims to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 89% of the global population used improved drinking water sources, a rise of 13 percentage points in 22 years or 2.3 billion people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 64% of the global population used improved sanitation facilities, a rise of 15 percentage points since 1990. Some 2.5 billion people &ndash; two-thirds of whom live in Asia, and a quarter in sub-Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sanitation facilities. There are 46 countries where at least half the population is not using an improved sanitation facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Although declining across all regions, open defecation is practised by 1 billion people, 82% of whom live in 10 countries. Nine out of 10 people defecating in the open live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Wealthy people universally have higher access to sanitation than the poor. In some countries this gap is narrowing. The gap is increasing, however, in rural areas of countries with low coverage and for marginalized and excluded groups.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 748 million people &ndash; 90% living in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia (43% in Sub-Saharan Africa, and 47% in Asia) &ndash; still use unimproved drinking water sources; 82% live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to access the salient findings of 69th Round of NSS regarding [inside]Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India (July 2012 to December 2012)[/inside].&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/NSS%2069th%20Round%20drinking%20water%20sanitation%20hygiene%20survey.pdf" title="NSS 69th round drinking water sanitation hygiene survey">click here</a> to download the full report Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th Round, July 2012-December 2012, MoSPI.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the [inside]WHO/UNICEF joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation[/inside],&nbsp;<a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf</a>, are as follows:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India with 626 million people who practice open defecation, has more than twice the number of the next 18 countries combined;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 90 per cent of the 692 million people in South Asia who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 593 million in China and 251 million in India gained access to improved sanitation since 1990.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; China and India account for just under half the global progress on sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Water</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2010, 89 per cent of the world&rsquo;s population, or 6.1 billion people, used improved drinking water sources, exceeding the MDG target (88 per cent); 92 per cent are expected to have access in 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2010, two billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Eleven per cent of the global population, or 783 million people, are still without access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2015 the WHO/UNICEF JMP projects that 605 million will still not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Sanitation</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 63 per cent of the global population use toilets and other improved sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2015, 67 per cent will have access to improved sanitation facilities (the MDG target is 75 per cent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 2.5 billion people lack improved sanitation, projected be 2.4 billion by 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 1.1 billion people (15 per cent of the global population) practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 949 million open defecators live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Countries that account for almost three-quarters of the people who practice open defecation:</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">India (626 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Indonesia (63 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Pakistan (40 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Ethiopia (38 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nigeria (34 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Sudan (19 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nepal (15 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">China (14 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Niger (12 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Burkina Faso (9.7 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Mozambique (9.5 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Cambodia (8.6 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the policy report titled [inside]Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011)[/inside], Water Aid,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf">http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has made a political commitment of reaching universal access to clean water by 2012. It has made the political commitment of reaching universal access to urban sanitation by 2012 and rural sanitation by 2017.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The population in India without access to water is 147.3 million. The population in India without access to sanitation is 818.4 million (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, 2010).&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008; however, the progress has been highly inequitable, with the poorest households barely benefiting. Only five million from the poorest section benefited compared with 43 million and 93 million from the richest sections.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Whereas every rural household in Sikkim and Kerala has access to sanitation, and states such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana and West Bengal have seen big improvements to access since 2001, in Bihar 73% of rural households lack adequate sanitation, and across India almost a third of the rural population does not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The five countries with the largest absolute numbers of people without sanitation&ndash;India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan&ndash;are all middle income and account for over 1.7 billion people without sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; WaterAid research in India illustrates how scheduled castes are denied access to water facilities and how scheduled caste children are not allowed to drink water from common sources at school.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India and China were top 10 recipients for clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) aid for nine and eight years respectively, which is consistent with the fact that these two countries are home to the greatest number of people without water and sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In India, the cost of construction of Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs) in the Total Sanitation Campaign is expected to be met by Above Poverty Line households, while for Below Poverty Line households, the cost is shared between the Government of India, the state and individual users, with the exact ratio depending on the unit cost of the facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Diarrhoea, 88 percent of which is caused due to lack of access to clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), is now the biggest killer of children in Africa and the second biggest killer of children worldwide. It is responsible for 2.2 million deaths each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Lack of access to water and sanitation is a major drag on economic growth, and costs African and Asian countries up to 6% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Poor people in South Asia are over 13 times less likely to have access to sanitation than the rich; and poor people in Sub-Saharan Africa are over 15 times more likely to practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There is a rural-urban divide in access to clean water and sanitation. 94% of the urban population in developing countries has access to clean water, compared to 76% &nbsp;in rural areas, and 68% of the urban population has access to improved sanitation, compared with only 40% in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; For families without a drinking-water source at home, it is usually women and girls who go to collect drinking water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost three-quarters of households.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Historically, local natural monopolies have been in public ownership, and about 90% of the world&rsquo;s piped water is delivered by publicly-owned bodies, at both national and municipal levels.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Increasing overall WASH spending to 3.5% of GDP and sanitation to 1% are very large changes from current levels&mdash;but this is the scale of change that is needed if the MDG targets are to be achieved in all regions and LDCs are to get on course for universal access by 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations[/inside] by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010<br /> <a href="http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf">http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Young children are most at risk of death from unsafe water, and women and children are typically responsible for most water collection.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Multiple randomized trials show that water treatment can cost-effectively reduce reported diarrhea. However, many consumers have low willingness to pay for cleaner water, with less than 10% of households purchasing household water treatment under existing retail models.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Provision of information on water quality can increase demand, but only modestly. Free point of collection water treatment systems designed to make water treatment convenient, salient, and public, combined with a local promoter, can generate take up of more than 60 percent. The projected cost is as low as $20 per year of life saved, comparable to vaccines. In contrast, the limited existing evidence suggests many consumers are willing to pay for better access to water, but it does not yet demonstrate that this improves health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Providing dilute chlorine solution free at the point of water collection, together with a local promoter, can increase take up of water treatment from less than 10 percent to more than 60 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Evidence available from randomized studies suggests that consumers realize substantial non-health benefits from convenient access to water and are willing to pay for this.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Separately identifying how water quantity and quality affect health is important because different water interventions affect water quality and quantity asymmetrically. For example, adding chlorine to water affects quality but not quantity. On the other hand, providing household connections to municipal water supplies to households that currently use standpipes is likely to have a bigger effect on the convenience of obtaining water, and thus on the quantity of water consumed, than on water quality.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Increased availability and convenience of water facilitates more frequent washing of hands, dishes, bodies and clothes, thus reducing disease transmission. There is indeed strong evidence that hand washing is important for health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent collection of self-reported diarrhea data through repeated interviews leads to health protective behavior change in addition to respondent fatigue and social desirability bias.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent data collection leads to lower reports of child diarrhea by mothers relative to infrequent surveying and also to higher rates of chlorination verified by tests for chlorine in water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page** </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09 (released in 2010)[/inside], National Sample Survey, <a href="http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf">http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The field work of the nationwide survey was carried out during July 2008 to June 2009. The report is based on the Central sample of 1,53,518 households (97,144 in rural areas and 56,374 in urban areas) surveyed from 8,130 sample villages in rural areas and 4,735 urban blocks spread over all States and Union Territories.<br /> <br /> <em>Availability of Drinking Water Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas the major source of drinking water (most often used) was &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; in respect of 55 per cent of households followed by &lsquo;tap&rsquo; for 30 per cent of households.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, &lsquo;tap&rsquo; was the major source of drinking water for 74 per cent of the households and &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; served another 18 per cent households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The three sources of drinking water, &lsquo;tap&rsquo;, &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; and &lsquo;well&rsquo; together served nearly 97 per cent of rural households and 95 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 86 per cent of the rural households and 91 per cent of urban households got sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the first major source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Shortage of drinking water set in the month of March and gradually reached a peak during May; thereafter, the situation of availability of drinking water gradually improved and by August the situation improved substantially.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the month of May drinking water for 13 per cent of the rural households and 8 per cent of the urban households was insufficient.<br /> <br /> &bull; Drinking water facility within the premises was available to nearly 41 per cent of rural households and 75 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> <em>Bathroom Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Bathroom facility was not available to nearly 64 per cent of rural households, while in urban areas, the proportion of households with no bathroom was lower, nearly 22 per cent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In the rural areas, detached bathrooms were more common (23 per cent of the households) than were attached bathrooms (13 per cent of the households).<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, a higher proportion of households (48 per cent) had attached bathroom than detached bathroom (nearly 31 per cent).<br /> <br /> <em>Sanitation Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility whereas 11 per cent of urban households did not have any latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 14 per cent of the households in rural areas and 8 per cent in urban areas used pit latrine.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull; In rural areas, septic tank/flush latrine was used by 18 per cent households as compared to 77 per cent households in urban areas.</span><br /> <br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>Electricity Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; At the all-India level, nearly 75 per cent of the households had electricity for domestic use. While 66 per cent households in rural areas had this facility, 96 per cent in urban areas had the facility.<br /> <br /> <em>Households With Three Basic Facilities: Drinking Water Within Premises, Latrine and Electricity </em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) whereas in urban areas, all three facilities were available to 68 per cent households.<br /> <br /> <em>Micro Environmental Elements Surrounding the House</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 19 per cent of the households in rural areas and 6 per cent in urban areas had open katcha drainage. Nearly 57 per cent of the households in rural areas and 15 per cent in urban areas had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Garbage disposal arrangement was available to only 24 per cent of rural households and 79 per cent of the urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of the rural households and 6 per cent of the urban households had no direct opening to road.</span><br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update (WHO and UNICEF)[/inside], <a href="http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf">http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf</a>: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Use of improved sanitation facilities is low in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Among the 2.6 billion people in the world who do not use improved sanitation facilities, by far the greatest number are in Southern Asia, but there are also large numbers in Eastern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;61% of global population uses improved sanitation facilities</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Unless huge efforts are made, the proportion of people without access to basic sanitation will not be halved by 2015. Even if we meet the MDG target, there will still be 1.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation. If the trend remains as currently projected, an additional billion people who should have benefited from MDG progress will miss out, and by 2015, there will be 2.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;672 million people will still lack access to improved drinking-water sources in 2015.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Sub-Saharan Africa faces the greatest challenge in increasing the use of improved drinking-water. 884 million people &ndash; 37% of whom live in Sub&ndash;Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sources for drinking-water</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In China, 89% of the population of 1.3 billion uses drinking-water from improved sources, up from 67% in 1990. In India, 88% of the population of 1.2 billion uses drinking-water from such sources, as compared to 72% in 1990. China and India together account for a 47% share, of the 1.8 billion people that gained access to improved drinking-water sources between 1990 and 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For sanitation, even with the increase between 1990 and 2008 in the proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities in China (from 41% to 55%) and India (from 18% to 31%), the world is not on track to meet the sanitation target. This is despite the fact that 475 million people gained access to improved sanitation in these two countries alone, a 38% share of the 1.3 billion people that gained access globally.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the approximately 1.3 billion people who gained access to improved sanitation during the period 1990-2008, 64% live in urban areas.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Worldwide, 87% of the population gets their drinking-water from improved sources, and the corresponding figure for developing regions is also high at 84%. While 94% of the urban population of developing regions uses improved sources, it is only 76% of rural populations.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The rural population without access to an improved drinking-water source is over five times greater than that in urban areas. Of almost 1.8 billion people gaining access to improved drinking-water in the period 1990-2008, 59% live in urban areas. The urban-rural disparities are particularly striking in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are also visible in Asia and Latin America.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The proportion of the world population that practises open defecation declined by almost one third from 25% in 1990 to 17% in 2008. A decline in open defecation rates was recorded in all regions. In Sub-Saharan Africa, open defecation rates fell by 25 per cent. In absolute numbers, the population practising open defecation increased, however, from 188 million in 1990 to 224 million in 2008. In Southern Asia, home to 64% of the world population that defecate in the open, the practice decreased the most &ndash; from 66% in 1990 to 44% in 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 1990 and 2008, more than 1.2 billion people worldwide gained access to a piped connection on premises.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In developing regions, while 73% of the urban population uses piped water from a household connection, only 31% of rural inhabitants have access to household piped water supplies.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For families without a drinking-water source on the premises, it is usually women who go to the source to collect drinking-water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost two thirds of households, while in almost a quarter of households it is men who usually collect the water. In 12% of households, however, children carry the main responsibility for collecting water, with girls under 15 years of age being twice as likely to carry this responsibility as boys under the age of 15 years.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the study titled [inside]Combating Waterborne Disease at the Household Level (2007)[/inside], prepared by The International Network to Promote Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage and WHO, <a href="http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf">http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Globally, 1.1 billion lack access to an &ldquo;improved&rdquo; drinking water supply; many more drink water that is grossly contaminated.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4 billion cases of diarrhoea occur annually, of which 88% is attributable to unsafe water, and inadequate sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases, the vast majority children under 5. 90% of diarrhoeal deaths are borne by children under five, mostly in developing countries.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Lack of safe water perpetuates a cycle whereby poor populations become further disadvantaged, and poverty becomes entrenched.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; WHO estimates that 94% of diarrhoeal cases are preventable through modifications to the environment, including through interventions to increase the availability of clean water, and to improve sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A 2005 systematic review concluded that diarrhoeal episodes are reduced by 25% through improving water supply, 32% by improving sanitation, 45% through hand washing, and by 39% via household water treatment and safe storage.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A growing body of research suggests household water treatment and safe storage (HWTS):a. dramatically improves microbial water quality; b. significantly reduces diarrhoea; c. is among the most effective of water, sanitation and health interventions; d. is highly cost-effective; and e. can be rapidly deployed and taken up by vulnerable populations.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Existing low-cost technologies for safe drinking water are: a. Chlorination &ndash; adding chlorine in liquid or tablet form to drinking water stored in a protected container; b. Solar disinfection &ndash; exposing water in disposable clear plastic bottles to sunlight for a day, typically on the roof of a house; c. Filtration; d. Combined flocculation /disinfection systems&ndash;adding powders or tablets to coagulate and flocculate sediments in water followed by a timed release of disinfectant; e. boiling; f. Safe storage<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Many low-cost HWTS technologies do not come with clear labels and reliable accreditations attesting to their ability to provide &ldquo;safe&rdquo; water. This has led to uncertainty and confusion among consumers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]11th Five Year Plan[/inside]</span><br /> <a href="http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf</span></a>:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The status of provision of water and sanitation has improved slowly. According to Census 1991, 55.54% of the rural population had access to an improved water source. As on 1 April 2007, the Department of Drinking Water Supply&rsquo;s figures show that out of a total of 1,50,7349 rural habitations in the country, 74.39% (11,21,366 habitations) are fully covered and 14.64% (2,20,165 habitations) are partially covered. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;Present estimates shows that out of the 2.17 lakh water quality affected habitation as on 1.4.05, about 70,000 habitations have since been addressed for providing safe drinking water.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The access to toilets is even poorer. As per the latest Census data (2001), only 36.4% of the total population has latrines within or attached to their houses. However in rural areas, only 21.9% of population has latrines within or attached to their houses. An estimate based on the number of individual household toilets constructed under the TSC programme (a demand-driven programme implemented since 1999) puts the sanitation coverage in the country at about 49% (as on November 2007). </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;An evaluation study on the programme conducted in 2002 shows 80% of toilets constructed were put to use. This use is expected to be much higher as awareness has improved much since 2002.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The GoI&rsquo;s major intervention in water sector started in 1972&ndash;73 through Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) for assisting States/Uts to accelerate the coverage of drinking water supply. In 1986, the entire programme was given a mission approach with the launch of the Technology Mission on Drinking Water and Related Water Management. This Technology Mission was later renamed as Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991&ndash;92. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;In 1999, Department of Drinking Water Supply (DDWS) was formed under the MoRD to give emphasis to rural water supply as well as on sanitation. In the same year, new initiatives in water sector had been initiated through Sector Reform Project, later it was scaled up as Swajaldhara in 2002. With sustained interventions, DDWS remains an important institution to support the States/UTs in serving the rural population with water and sanitation related services all across India.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;There are about 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations in the country with more than half of the habitations affected with excess iron (118088). This is followed by fluoride (31306), salinity (23495), nitrate (13958), arsenic (5029) in that order. There are about 25000 habitations affected with multiple problems. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 States. Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam. The hand pump attached de-fluoridation and iron removal plants have failed due to in appropriate technology unsuited to community perceptions and their involvement. Desalination plants have also met a similar fate due to lapses at various levels starting with planning to post implementation maintenance.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;To &lsquo;provide clean drinking water for all by 2009 and ensure that there are no slip-backs by the end of the Eleventh Plan&rsquo; is one of the monitorable targets of the Eleventh Five Year Plan. The first part of the goal coincides with the terminal year of Bharat Nirman Programme under which it is proposed to provide safe drinking water to all habitations. Under the Bharat Nirman Programme 55,067 not covered habitations, 2.8 lakh slipped back habitations, and 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations are proposed to be covered.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">**page**</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">&nbsp; </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"><em>According to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS AND FIGURES&nbsp; *updated November 2004:</em> </span></span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases (including cholera); 90% are children under 5, mostly in developing countries. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;88% of diarrhoeal disease is attributed to unsafe water supply, inadequate sanitation and hygiene. Improved water supply reduces diarrhoea morbidity by between 6% to 25%, if severe outcomes are included. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improved sanitation reduces diarrhoea morbidity by 32%. Hygiene interventions including hygiene education and promotion of hand washing can lead to a reduction of diarrhoeal cases by up to 45%. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improvements in drinking-water quality through household water treatment, such as chlorination at point of use, can lead to a reduction of diarrhoea episodes by between 35% and 39%.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.3 million people die of malaria each year, 90% of whom are children under 5. There are 396 million episodes of malaria every year, most of the disease burden is in Africa south of the Sahara. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Intensified irrigation, dams and other water related projects contribute importantly to this disease burden. Better management of water resources reduces transmission of malaria and other vector-borne diseases.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world &iacute;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world&rsquo;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The development of water resources continues in an accelerated pace to meet the food, fibre and energy needs of a world population of 8 billion by 2025. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Lack of capacity for health impact assessment transfers hidden costs to the health sector and increases the disease burden on local communities. Environmental management approaches for health need to be incorporated into strategies for integrated water resources management.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => '', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 12, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-sanitation-55', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 55, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [[maximum depth reached]], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 25, 'metaTitle' => 'Environment | Water and Sanitation', 'metaKeywords' => '', 'metaDesc' => 'KEY TRENDS &nbsp; &bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural...', 'disp' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />&bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />&bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25, 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Report%20No.%209%20of%202021_GWMR_English-061c19df1d9dff7.23091105.pdf">click here</a> to access&nbsp;the [inside]Report no 9 of 2021: Performance Audit of Ground Water Management and Regulation for the period 2013-18 (laid on the floor of the Parliament on 21 December, 2021)[/inside]. Kindly <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/CAG%20Press%20Release%20Groundwater%2021%20Dec%202021.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1UNMLzOUev1axQLA4c-0XyJ5BEYk8mN7NshA-OPmNWf2pmfPd8jvGnc80">click here</a> to access the&nbsp;press release by CAG dated 21 December, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access the key findings of [inside]NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019)[/inside].<br /> <br /> Kindly <a href="mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Report_584_final.pdf">click here</a> to access the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019).<br /> <br /> According to the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019):<br /> <br /> &bull; The major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 48.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 57.5 percent of the households in the urban areas had exclusive access to principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 87.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 90.9 percent of the households in the urban areas had sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the principal source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 58.2 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 80.7 percent of the households in the urban areas had drinking water facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 94.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 97.4 percent of the households in the urban areas used &lsquo;improved source of drinking water&rsquo;.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 51.4 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 72.0 percent of the households in the urban areas used improved source of drinking water located in the household premises which was sufficiently available throughout the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 56.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to bathroom.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to bathroom, about 48.4 percent in the rural areas and about 74.8 percent in the urban areas used bathroom attached to the dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 71.3 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to latrine. It may be noted that there may be respondent bias in the reporting of access to latrine as question on benefits received by the households from government schemes was asked prior to the question on access of households to latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; The major type of latrine used by the households was flush/pour-flush to septic tank in both rural and urban areas. About 50.9 percent of the households in rural areas and 48.9 percent of the households in urban areas used flush/pour-flush to septic tank type of latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 94.7 percent of the males and 95.7 percent of the females in the rural areas used latrine regularly while about 98.0 percent of the males and 98.1 percent of the females in the urban areas used latrine regularly.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 93.8 percent of the males and 94.6 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine while about 97.2 percent of both males and females in the urban areas regularly used improved latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 85.8 percent of the males and 86.4 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine which was for exclusive use of the household while the corresponding figure was about 82.4 percent for males and 84.7 percent for females in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 3.5 percent of the household members in the rural areas and about 1.7 percent of the household members in the urban areas never used latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households used latrine, about 4.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 2.1 percent of the households in the urban areas reported that water was not available in or around the latrine used.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 48.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 86.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had bathroom and latrine both within household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 96.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 63.8 percent of the households in the urban areas had own dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 96.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.5 percent of the households in the urban areas used the house for residential purpose only.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 89.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 56.4 percent of the households in the urban areas had independent house.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 76.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.0 percent of the households in the urban areas had the house of pucca structure.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, average floor area of the dwelling unit was about 46.6 sq. mtr. in the rural areas and about 46.1 sq. mtr. in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 93.9 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 99.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had electricity for domestic use.<br /> <br /> <br /> **page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the [inside]CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit of National Rural Drinking Water Programme (published on 7th August, 2018)[/inside] in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) was launched with the objective of providing adequate safe water for drinking, cooking and other domestic needs to every rural person on a sustainable basis. The 12th Plan aimed at providing all rural habitations, schools and anganwadis with safe drinking water by December, 2017. It also envisaged that at least 50 percent of the rural population will be provided piped water supply at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) within the household premises or at a distance of not more than 100 meters from their households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP also aimed to provide household connection to 35 percent of rural households. The NRDWP is being implemented in the states through its six components and through other focused schemes. During the 12th FYP period (2012-17), a total of Rs. 89,956 crore (Central share of Rs. 43,691 crore and state share of Rs. 46,265 crore) was provided for the Programme of which&nbsp; Rs. 81,168 crore was spent during this period.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were set for achievement by 2017 viz. (i) all rural habitations, Government schools and anganwadis to have access to safe drinking water; (ii) 50 per cent of rural population to be provided potable drinking water (55 lpcd) by piped water supply; and (iii) 35 per cent of rural households to be provided household connections.<br /> <br /> &bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by eight percent at 40 lpcd and 5.5 percent at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP was an important element in Government of India&rsquo;s commitment to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal Number 6 which relates to ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.&nbsp; The Ministry had informed (September 2017) that while its objective was to provide drinking water to every Indian household, it would require approximately Rs. 23,000 crore annually till 2030 (at present cost) to achieve this goal and given the present level of outlays, the SDG cannot be realized solely through NRDWP efforts.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Planning and Delivery Mechanism:</em> The planning and delivery framework established at the Centre and states deviated from the NRDWP guidelines. Twenty one states did not frame Water Security Plans and deficiencies were found in preparation and scrutiny of Annual Action Plans such as lack of stakeholder and community participation, non-inclusion of minimum service level of water in schemes and absence of approval of State Level Scheme Sanctioning Committee for schemes included in the plans. The apex level National Drinking Water and Sanitation Council set up to co-ordinate and ensure convergence remained largely dormant. The agencies vital for planning and execution of the Programme such as State Water and Sanitation Mission, State Technical Agency, Source Finding Committee and Block Resource Centres were either not set up or were not performing their assigned functions. These constraints both in terms of planning and delivery ultimately affected achievement of Programme goals and targets.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Fund Management: </em>The NRDWP is implemented as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme with cost being shared between the Central and State Governments. The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation&rsquo;s expectations that the states would be able to compensate for reduced Central allocation by increasing their own financial commitment to the scheme taking into account the increased devolution based on the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission was belied. Thus, the overall availability of funds for the Programme declined during the period 2013-14 to 2016-17. However, even the reduced allocations of funds remained unutilised. There were&nbsp; delays of over 15 months in release of Central share to nodal/ implementing agencies. There was also diversion of funds towards inadmissible items of expenditure and blocking of funds amounting to Rs. 662.61 crore with State Water and Sanitation Missions and work executing agencies.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Programme Implementation:</em> The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were to be achieved by end of 2017 as brought out above. This was attributable partly to deficiencies in implementation such as incomplete, abandoned and non-operational works, unproductive expenditure on equipment, non-functional sustainability structures and gaps in contract management that had a total financial implication of Rs. 2,212.44 crore.<br /> <br /> &bull; Only five percent of quality affected habitations had been provided with Community Water Purification Plants and there was slow progress in setting up such plants out of funds provided by the NITI Aayog. Sustainability plans were either not prepared/ implemented or not included in the Annual Action Plans. There was inadequate focus on surface water based schemes and a large number of schemes&nbsp; (98 percent) including piped water schemes continued to be based on ground water resources. Operation and Maintenance plans were either not prepared in most of the states or had deficiencies leading to schemes becoming non-functional. As a result, incidence of slip-back habitations has persisted.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Lastly, lack of required number of labs at states/ district/ sub-divisional level resulted shortfall in prescribed quality tests of water sources and supply thereby compromising the objective of providing safe drinking water to the rural population.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Monitoring and Evaluation: </em>Data in the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) of the Programme lacked consistency and accuracy due to insufficient authentication and validation controls. The expert teams for inspection viz. Vigilance and Monitoring Committees to monitor and review implementation of NRDWP were either not established or were not functioning in the planned manner. Social audit of the programme to measure beneficiary level satisfaction was not conducted. Hence, the overall monitoring and oversight framework lacked effectiveness and there was inadequate community involvement in this exercise.<br /> &nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> Rural sanitation did not feature on the investment horizon during the first five plan periods as reflected in its negligible funding share. However, it received prominence from the Sixth Plan (1980-85) onwards amid the launch of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation decade in 1980, says the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf">51st Report of Standing Committee</a> on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin. India&rsquo;s first nationwide programme for rural sanitation, the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP), was launched in 1986, in the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) with the objective of improving the quality of life of rural people and to provide privacy and dignity to women. The programme provided large subsidy for construction of sanitary latrines for BPL households.<br /> <br /> The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), was launched with effect from 1st April, 1999 following a &lsquo;community led&rsquo; and &lsquo;people centered&rsquo; approach. The TSC moved away from the principle of state-wise allocation to a &ldquo;demand-driven&rdquo; approach. The programme laid emphasis on Information, Education and Communication (IEC) for generation of effective demand for sanitation facilities. It also laid emphasis on school sanitation and hygiene education for bringing about attitudinal and behavioral changes for adoption of hygienic practices from an early age.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> In order to encourage the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) to take up sanitation promotion, the incentive award scheme of Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP) was launched in 2005. The award was given to those PRIs which attained 100 percent open defecation free environment. This award publicized the sanitation programme significantly across the country.<br /> &nbsp;<br /> Encouraged by the initial success of NGP, and looking into the need to upscale sanitation interventions, the TSC was revamped as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) in 2012, with the objective to accelerate the sanitation coverage in rural areas so as to comprehensively cover rural population through renewed strategies and saturation approach and also to transform rural India into Nirmal Bharat.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> In order to significantly upscale the programme, and bring the nation&#39;s focus on the issue of sanitation, the Government of India had launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) viz. SMB (G) on 2nd October, 2014 to accelerate efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in the country by 2nd October, 2019. With the launch of SBM (G), the construction of toilets in schools and anganwadis has been mandated to the Ministry of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Women and Child Development respectively for greater focus.<br /> <br /> Under the SBM, the focus is on behavior change. Community based collective behavior change has been mentioned as the preferred approach, although the states are free to choose the approach best suited to them. Focus is also on creation of complete open defecation free (ODF) villages, rather than only on construction of individual toilets.<br /> <br /> The key findings of the [inside]51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018)[/inside], are as&nbsp; follows <em>(please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access)</em>:<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) was started in 2014 in rural areas of the country. The Cabinet approved the total estimated outlay of Rs. 1,34,386.61 crore for SBM (G). The financial burden of SBM (G) between the Centre and states is in the ratio of 60:40, with the exception of special category states where the share is 90:10. From 2014-15 to 2017-18, the central allocation made for SBM (G) has been Rs. 36,836.27 crore, of which Rs. 36,825.48 crore has been released to the states. For the financial year 2018-2019, an allocation of Rs. 30,343 crore has been made, with Rs. 7,509.82 crore already released to the states as of May 2018. The remaining Rs. 22,833.18 crore is planned to be released during the course of the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the time of launch of the SBM (G) on 2nd October, 2014, the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20in%20India%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage in India as on 24th May 2018">sanitation coverage in the country</a> was 38.7 percent. This has increased to 84.13 percent as on 24th May, 2018.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20across%20states%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage across states as on 24th May 2018">Sanitation coverage as on 24th May</a>, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; 386 districts, 3,578 blocks, 1,62,688 gram panchayats and 3,66,774 villages have been declared open defecation free (ODF) as on 24th May, 2018. As on 24th May, 2018, 17 states/ UTs namely Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Mizoram, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Meghalaya, Dadar &amp; Nagar Haveli, Daman &amp; Diu, Maharashtra &amp; Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands have been declared ODF. There are around 3 crore households pending as on 1st April, 2018, which are likely to be benefitted from this scheme in 2018-19.<br /> <br /> &bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20ODF%20villages%20across%20states.jpg" title="Proportion of ODF villages across states">proportion of villages</a>, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent).<br /> <br /> &bull; The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) through an Independent Verification Agency has done the National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey 2017-2018.&nbsp; In that survey, 92,040 households in 6,136 villages across all states were covered. The main findings of survey are: 1. Nearly 77 percent households in rural India have access to toilets <em>[the corresponding figure as per the SBM-G Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) at the midpoint of the survey period was 76 percent]</em>; 2. Roughly 93.4 percent of the households having access to a toilet use regularly; 3. Nearly 95.6 percent ODF verified villages confirmed ODF; 4. About 70 percent of the villages found to have minimal litter and stagnant water; 5. Roughly 70 percent villages found to have minimal stagnant water.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to the MDWS, the number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Household%20toilets%20constructed%20in%20India%20in%20lakhs.jpg" title="Household toilets constructed in India">household toilets constructed</a> was 58 lakhs in 2014-15, 126 lakhs in 2015-16, 218 lakhs in 2016-17 and 294 lakhs in 2017-18.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/State%20and%20UT%20wise%20IHHLs%20constructed%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="State and UT wise IHHLs constructed under SBM_Gramin">individual household latrines (IHHLs) </a>constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 7.2 crore. Most IHHL construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in Uttar Pradesh (around 98 lakhs), followed by Rajasthan (76.4 lakhs) and Madhya Pradesh (56.2 lakhs). As per the Cabinet Note, 9.72 crore IHHLs <em>(8.84 crore eligible for incentive and 0.88 crore non-eligible for APLs)</em> to be constructed under SBM (G), says the report.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20persons%20using%20toilets%20for%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202017-18.jpg" title="Proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets in 2017-18">National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey</a> (2017-18), the proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets was the lowest in Tamil Nadu (71.4 percent), followed by Puducherry (78.4 percent), Odisha (85.4 percent), Uttar Pradesh (87.9 percent) and Jharkhand (92.2 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.2 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20households%20having%20access%20to%20water%20for%20use%20in%20toilets%20out%20of%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202016_1.jpg" title="Proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets in 2016">Swachhata Status Report 2016</a> of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), the proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets was the lowest in Odisha (77.5 percent), followed by Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh (both 84.0 percent), Madhya Pradesh (89.2 percent), West Bengal (89.8 percent) and Bihar (90.0 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.9 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Community%20Sanitary%20Complexes.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Community Sanitary Complexes (CSC)</a> constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 10,002. Most number of CSCs construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in West Bengal (2,063), followed by Arunachal Pradesh (1,266), Jammu &amp; Kashmir (1,238), Himachal Pradesh (1,081) and Andhra Pradesh (616).<br /> <br /> &bull; The share of Central expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G) was Rs. 3,748.8 lakhs in 2014-15, Rs. 4,311.49 lakhs in 2015-16, Rs. 4,982.04 lakhs in 2016-17 and Rs. 7,484.69 lakhs in 2017-18. There is significant variation across the states in terms of Centre&#39;s share of expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G).&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Although the funds released under the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachh%20Bharat%20Kosh.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Swachh Bharat Kosh</a> of SBM (G) for Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands, Assam, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Odisha and Tripura was altogether Rs. 399.86 crore, the funds utilised as per the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) was Rs. 129.41 crore. It may be noted that the Swachh Bharat Kosh was set up in 2015 by the Ministry of Finance for channelizing the voluntary contribution from individuals and corporate sectors in response to the call given by Hon&#39;ble Prime Minister to achieve Swachh Bharat by 2nd October, 2019.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Unspent%20Balances%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="Unspent Balances under SBM_Gramin">Unspent balances</a> under the SBM (G) was Rs. -886.27 crore in 2015-16, Rs. -320.50 in 2016-17, Rs. 4,197.38 crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 9,890.84 crore in 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018)</em>. States like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances under the programme. As per the MDWS, the reasons for high unspent balance in some states under SBM (G) are: a. Inadequate capacity at grass root level; and b. Existence of revolving funds and leveraging other sources of credit. In its reply to a query by the Standing Committee, the MDWS has said that higher unspent balance in states automatically reduces their eligibility for further fund release in the subsequent year. Due to this specific modality and inbuilt provision in the SBM (G) guidelines, states observe better financial discipline. Strict monitoring methods are adopted to obtain the progress of each district on real time basis using the online monitoring system. Regular review meetings/ video conferences etc. are organized by the MDWS to discuss issues relating to implementation of the SBM (G) and utilization of funds&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; The Parliamentary Standing Committee has found out that during the year 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018) </em>there was huge unspent balance to the tune of Rs. 9,890.84 crore under the SBM (G). The Committee has observed that the problem of unspent balance is more prominent in certain states as compared to others. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report says that states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh Rs. 2,836.82 crore, in Bihar Rs. 2,764.62 crore, in Madhya Pradesh Rs. 866.68 crore, in Assam Rs. 606.30 crore, in Odisha Rs. 436.71 crore and in Andhra Pradesh Rs. 420.16 crore are lying unspent.<br /> <br /> &bull; The MDWS has claimed about 84 percent of sanitation coverage in the rural areas of India as on 24th May, 2018. However, contrary to the figures that was projected by the Ministry, the Parliamentary Standing Committee while examining the subject says that the sanitation coverage figures seemed to be more on &quot;paper&quot; but the actual progress at the ground level is very lethargic. Even a village with 100 percent household toilets cannot be declared ODF till all the inhabitants start using them, says the report. The main thrust of the government should be on the usage of toilets as mere building of toilets alone is not sufficient for the realization of actual vision of an ODF country.<br /> <br /> &bull; Much more is required to be done so as to bring in &quot;behavioural change&quot; in rural populace so as to attain the real motive behind the SBM (G), says the report. In the wake of this serious concern, the Standing Committee has recommended the MDWS to bring about a radical transformation in the &quot;behavioural&quot; aspects of the rural masses by inculcating in them a sense of hygiene and well-being through mass extensive awareness campaigns and other suitable mechanisms, so that the gap in the figures projected and the ground reality may be abridged for the betterment of the country.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Standing Committee has found that the performance of some of states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha in terms of sanitation is very poor. Appalled by the slackness of sanitation coverage in these states, the Committee enquired from the MDWS about the state of affairs. In response to that, the Ministry has informed that they are aware of it and have given special emphasis to the said states through various innovative measures. In this context, the Secretary of the MDWS candidly admitted before the Standing Committee about the dismal performance of bigger states and assured the Committee that the Government will take all necessary steps and will also provide extra budgetary resources to these states so as to improve the situation. The Parliamentary Standing Committee has observed that the efforts made by the government are not complete if the issue of awareness generation is left behind in this demand driven programme. The Committee has strongly recommended that the MDWS should pay more attention towards pace of sanitation in the low performing states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha on a war footing.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Committee is wary of the poor nature of construction and low quality of raw materials being used in the construction of toilets under SBM (G) as found by members themselves and through different feedbacks. The Committee has pressed upon the MDWS to ensure that the quality of raw materials used for construction of toilets under SBM (G) are of a good standard commensurate with the amount being spent as incentive to the beneficiaries without any compromise.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">A Rapid Survey on Swachhta Status was conducted by the NSSO during May-June 2015 alongside its regular 72nd Round (July 2014-June 2015) survey covering 3,788 villages and 2,907 urban blocks. The number of households surveyed was 73,176 in rural India and 41,538 in urban India.<br /> <br /> The survey aims to give a snapshot of the situation on the availability/ accessibility of toilets, solid waste and liquid waste management at sample village/ ward and household levels aggregated at state and country-levels.<br /> <br /> As per the report entitled [inside]Swachhta Status Report 2016[/inside], which has been prepared by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; Out of the 3788 villages surveyed, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose.<br /> <br /> &bull; From the 2,907 sample urban frame survey (UFS) blocks surveyed at all-India level, 42.0 percent wards were found to have community/ public toilets. At all India-level, 1.6 percent wards were found to be having the community /public toilets but not using them.<br /> <br /> &bull; In 54.9 percent of the villages having community toilets, cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the panchayat or on contract payment. In 17.0 percent villages, it was being done by the residents themselves. However, 22.6 percent villages were such where the community toilets were not being cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, cleaning of community/ public toilets was being done by the persons employed by the local municipal body in 73.1 percent wards having these toilets. 12.2 percent wards were such where the cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the residents&rsquo; welfare association. However, community/ public toilets in 8.6 percent wards were not being cleaned by anybody.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 36.8 percent wards in urban areas reported to have a proper liquid waste disposal system for community/ public toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 36.7 percent villages had pakki nali and 19.0 percent villages had katchi nali as drainage arrangement for waste water coming out of the rural households. 44.4 percent villages had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 56.4 percent wards reported to have sewer network for disposal of liquid waste.<br /> <br /> &bull; 78.1 percent wards reported to have a system of street cleaning.<br /> <br /> &bull; 64.2 percent wards were found to have a dumping place for solid waste. These solid waste dumping places were cleaned every day in case of 48.2 percent wards, on a weekly basis in case of 37.7 percent wards and on a monthly basis in case of 9.3 percent wards.&nbsp; However, 4.9 percent wards were such where the solid waste dumping place was not cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 50.5 percent of the households kept the garbage at a specified place outside their own house, 24.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the nearby agriculture field, 5.5 percent households kept it at the common place outside the house, 4.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the biogas plant or manure pit whereas 15.1 percent households threw it around the house.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 45.3 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, 88.8 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India for the households having sanitary toilet, percentage of persons using household/ community toilet was 95.6 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India for the households having sanitary toilet, the percentage of persons using household/ community/ public toilet was 98.7 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India, 42.5 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilet.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, 87.9 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 52.1 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 7.5 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 55.4 percent households contributed to open defecation. This percentage in urban areas was 8.9 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the [inside]Economic Survey 2015-16[/inside], Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>):<br /> <br /> &bull; The Census of India 2011 informs that around 70 percent of India&rsquo;s population (650 million) lives in rural and slum areas. It increases the possibility of exposure of the population to water-borne and vector-borne diseases<br /> <br /> &bull; Only 46.6 percent of households in India have access to drinking water within their premises. A far lower, 43.5 percent of households have access to tap water. Similarly, less than 50 percent households have latrine facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) is accelerating efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage and eliminate open defecation in India by 2 October 2019. It also aims to promote better hygiene amongst the population and improve cleanliness by initiating Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) projects in villages, towns and cities.<br /> <br /> &bull; The progress in sanitation has witnessed a spurt since the launch of the Swachh Bharat Mission. In its first year, i.e. from 2 October 2014 to 2 October 2015, 88 lakh toilets were constructed, against an expected outcome of 60 lakhs. More than 122 lakh toilets have already been constructed in rural areas so far under the mission. Sanitation coverage, which stood at 40.60 percent as per NSSO data, has risen to around 48.8 percent as on 31 December 2015.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme estimates, 61 percent of rural Indians defecate in the open in 2015, compared with only 32 per cent of rural people in sub-Saharan Africa. Even sanitation laggards perform better than India, with 17 percent rural open defecation in Afghanistan and 15 percent in Kenya.<br /> <br /> &bull; In order to improve availability of drinking water in rural areas, the National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) initiated a new project supported by the World Bank, the &lsquo;Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project&ndash;Low Income States&rsquo; with a total cost of Rs. 6000 crore. The project aims to provide safe, 24 x 7 piped drinking water supply to 7.8 million rural population in four low-income States--Assam, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand--that have the lowest piped water supply and sanitation facilities. As on 31 December 2015, the project has implemented 275 single and multi-village piped drinking water supply schemes through the decentralized delivery mechanism of empowered Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committees.<br /> <br /> **page**<br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the United Nations&#39; report entitled: [inside]Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014[/inside] (released in May 2014), (Please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Indian scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 92 million people in India and 112 million people in China without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 792 million people in India and 478 million people in China without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Globally, India continues to be the country with the highest number of people (597 million people) practicing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Despite having some of the highest numbers of open defecators, India (597 million people), Nigeria (39 million people) and Indonesia (54 million people) do not feature among those countries making the greatest strides in reducing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population practicing open defecation in India declined from 74 percent in 1990 to 63 percent in 2000 and further to 48 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in India rose from 18 percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2000 and further to 36 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in rural India was 25 percent whereas in urban India it was 60 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in India rose from 70 percent in 1990 to 81 percent in 2000 and further to 93 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in rural India was 91 percent whereas in urban India it was 97 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Global scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990, almost 2 billion people globally have gained access to improved sanitation, and 2.3 billion have gained access to drinking-water from improved sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Some 1.6 billion of these people have piped water connections in their homes or compounds.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; More than half of the global population lives in cities, and urban areas are still better supplied with improved water and sanitation than rural ones. But the gap is decreasing. In 1990, more than 76% people living in urban areas had access to improved sanitation, as opposed to only 28% in rural ones. By 2012, 80% urban dwellers and 47% rural ones had access to better sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 1990, 95% people in urban areas could drink improved water, compared with 62% people in rural ones. By 2012, 96% people living in towns and 82% of those in rural areas had access to improved water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2012, 116 countries had met the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target for drinking water, 77 had met the MDG target for sanitation and 56 countries had met both targets. MDG 7.C aims to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 89% of the global population used improved drinking water sources, a rise of 13 percentage points in 22 years or 2.3 billion people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 64% of the global population used improved sanitation facilities, a rise of 15 percentage points since 1990. Some 2.5 billion people &ndash; two-thirds of whom live in Asia, and a quarter in sub-Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sanitation facilities. There are 46 countries where at least half the population is not using an improved sanitation facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Although declining across all regions, open defecation is practised by 1 billion people, 82% of whom live in 10 countries. Nine out of 10 people defecating in the open live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Wealthy people universally have higher access to sanitation than the poor. In some countries this gap is narrowing. The gap is increasing, however, in rural areas of countries with low coverage and for marginalized and excluded groups.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 748 million people &ndash; 90% living in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia (43% in Sub-Saharan Africa, and 47% in Asia) &ndash; still use unimproved drinking water sources; 82% live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to access the salient findings of 69th Round of NSS regarding [inside]Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India (July 2012 to December 2012)[/inside].&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/NSS%2069th%20Round%20drinking%20water%20sanitation%20hygiene%20survey.pdf" title="NSS 69th round drinking water sanitation hygiene survey">click here</a> to download the full report Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th Round, July 2012-December 2012, MoSPI.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the [inside]WHO/UNICEF joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation[/inside],&nbsp;<a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf</a>, are as follows:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India with 626 million people who practice open defecation, has more than twice the number of the next 18 countries combined;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 90 per cent of the 692 million people in South Asia who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 593 million in China and 251 million in India gained access to improved sanitation since 1990.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; China and India account for just under half the global progress on sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Water</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2010, 89 per cent of the world&rsquo;s population, or 6.1 billion people, used improved drinking water sources, exceeding the MDG target (88 per cent); 92 per cent are expected to have access in 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2010, two billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Eleven per cent of the global population, or 783 million people, are still without access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2015 the WHO/UNICEF JMP projects that 605 million will still not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Sanitation</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 63 per cent of the global population use toilets and other improved sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2015, 67 per cent will have access to improved sanitation facilities (the MDG target is 75 per cent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 2.5 billion people lack improved sanitation, projected be 2.4 billion by 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 1.1 billion people (15 per cent of the global population) practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 949 million open defecators live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Countries that account for almost three-quarters of the people who practice open defecation:</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">India (626 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Indonesia (63 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Pakistan (40 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Ethiopia (38 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nigeria (34 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Sudan (19 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nepal (15 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">China (14 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Niger (12 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Burkina Faso (9.7 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Mozambique (9.5 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Cambodia (8.6 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the policy report titled [inside]Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011)[/inside], Water Aid,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf">http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has made a political commitment of reaching universal access to clean water by 2012. It has made the political commitment of reaching universal access to urban sanitation by 2012 and rural sanitation by 2017.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The population in India without access to water is 147.3 million. The population in India without access to sanitation is 818.4 million (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, 2010).&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008; however, the progress has been highly inequitable, with the poorest households barely benefiting. Only five million from the poorest section benefited compared with 43 million and 93 million from the richest sections.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Whereas every rural household in Sikkim and Kerala has access to sanitation, and states such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana and West Bengal have seen big improvements to access since 2001, in Bihar 73% of rural households lack adequate sanitation, and across India almost a third of the rural population does not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The five countries with the largest absolute numbers of people without sanitation&ndash;India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan&ndash;are all middle income and account for over 1.7 billion people without sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; WaterAid research in India illustrates how scheduled castes are denied access to water facilities and how scheduled caste children are not allowed to drink water from common sources at school.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India and China were top 10 recipients for clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) aid for nine and eight years respectively, which is consistent with the fact that these two countries are home to the greatest number of people without water and sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In India, the cost of construction of Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs) in the Total Sanitation Campaign is expected to be met by Above Poverty Line households, while for Below Poverty Line households, the cost is shared between the Government of India, the state and individual users, with the exact ratio depending on the unit cost of the facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Diarrhoea, 88 percent of which is caused due to lack of access to clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), is now the biggest killer of children in Africa and the second biggest killer of children worldwide. It is responsible for 2.2 million deaths each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Lack of access to water and sanitation is a major drag on economic growth, and costs African and Asian countries up to 6% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Poor people in South Asia are over 13 times less likely to have access to sanitation than the rich; and poor people in Sub-Saharan Africa are over 15 times more likely to practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There is a rural-urban divide in access to clean water and sanitation. 94% of the urban population in developing countries has access to clean water, compared to 76% &nbsp;in rural areas, and 68% of the urban population has access to improved sanitation, compared with only 40% in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; For families without a drinking-water source at home, it is usually women and girls who go to collect drinking water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost three-quarters of households.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Historically, local natural monopolies have been in public ownership, and about 90% of the world&rsquo;s piped water is delivered by publicly-owned bodies, at both national and municipal levels.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Increasing overall WASH spending to 3.5% of GDP and sanitation to 1% are very large changes from current levels&mdash;but this is the scale of change that is needed if the MDG targets are to be achieved in all regions and LDCs are to get on course for universal access by 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations[/inside] by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010<br /> <a href="http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf">http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Young children are most at risk of death from unsafe water, and women and children are typically responsible for most water collection.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Multiple randomized trials show that water treatment can cost-effectively reduce reported diarrhea. However, many consumers have low willingness to pay for cleaner water, with less than 10% of households purchasing household water treatment under existing retail models.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Provision of information on water quality can increase demand, but only modestly. Free point of collection water treatment systems designed to make water treatment convenient, salient, and public, combined with a local promoter, can generate take up of more than 60 percent. The projected cost is as low as $20 per year of life saved, comparable to vaccines. In contrast, the limited existing evidence suggests many consumers are willing to pay for better access to water, but it does not yet demonstrate that this improves health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Providing dilute chlorine solution free at the point of water collection, together with a local promoter, can increase take up of water treatment from less than 10 percent to more than 60 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Evidence available from randomized studies suggests that consumers realize substantial non-health benefits from convenient access to water and are willing to pay for this.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Separately identifying how water quantity and quality affect health is important because different water interventions affect water quality and quantity asymmetrically. For example, adding chlorine to water affects quality but not quantity. On the other hand, providing household connections to municipal water supplies to households that currently use standpipes is likely to have a bigger effect on the convenience of obtaining water, and thus on the quantity of water consumed, than on water quality.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Increased availability and convenience of water facilitates more frequent washing of hands, dishes, bodies and clothes, thus reducing disease transmission. There is indeed strong evidence that hand washing is important for health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent collection of self-reported diarrhea data through repeated interviews leads to health protective behavior change in addition to respondent fatigue and social desirability bias.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent data collection leads to lower reports of child diarrhea by mothers relative to infrequent surveying and also to higher rates of chlorination verified by tests for chlorine in water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page** </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09 (released in 2010)[/inside], National Sample Survey, <a href="http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf">http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The field work of the nationwide survey was carried out during July 2008 to June 2009. The report is based on the Central sample of 1,53,518 households (97,144 in rural areas and 56,374 in urban areas) surveyed from 8,130 sample villages in rural areas and 4,735 urban blocks spread over all States and Union Territories.<br /> <br /> <em>Availability of Drinking Water Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas the major source of drinking water (most often used) was &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; in respect of 55 per cent of households followed by &lsquo;tap&rsquo; for 30 per cent of households.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, &lsquo;tap&rsquo; was the major source of drinking water for 74 per cent of the households and &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; served another 18 per cent households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The three sources of drinking water, &lsquo;tap&rsquo;, &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; and &lsquo;well&rsquo; together served nearly 97 per cent of rural households and 95 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 86 per cent of the rural households and 91 per cent of urban households got sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the first major source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Shortage of drinking water set in the month of March and gradually reached a peak during May; thereafter, the situation of availability of drinking water gradually improved and by August the situation improved substantially.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the month of May drinking water for 13 per cent of the rural households and 8 per cent of the urban households was insufficient.<br /> <br /> &bull; Drinking water facility within the premises was available to nearly 41 per cent of rural households and 75 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> <em>Bathroom Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Bathroom facility was not available to nearly 64 per cent of rural households, while in urban areas, the proportion of households with no bathroom was lower, nearly 22 per cent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In the rural areas, detached bathrooms were more common (23 per cent of the households) than were attached bathrooms (13 per cent of the households).<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, a higher proportion of households (48 per cent) had attached bathroom than detached bathroom (nearly 31 per cent).<br /> <br /> <em>Sanitation Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility whereas 11 per cent of urban households did not have any latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 14 per cent of the households in rural areas and 8 per cent in urban areas used pit latrine.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull; In rural areas, septic tank/flush latrine was used by 18 per cent households as compared to 77 per cent households in urban areas.</span><br /> <br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>Electricity Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; At the all-India level, nearly 75 per cent of the households had electricity for domestic use. While 66 per cent households in rural areas had this facility, 96 per cent in urban areas had the facility.<br /> <br /> <em>Households With Three Basic Facilities: Drinking Water Within Premises, Latrine and Electricity </em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) whereas in urban areas, all three facilities were available to 68 per cent households.<br /> <br /> <em>Micro Environmental Elements Surrounding the House</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 19 per cent of the households in rural areas and 6 per cent in urban areas had open katcha drainage. Nearly 57 per cent of the households in rural areas and 15 per cent in urban areas had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Garbage disposal arrangement was available to only 24 per cent of rural households and 79 per cent of the urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of the rural households and 6 per cent of the urban households had no direct opening to road.</span><br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update (WHO and UNICEF)[/inside], <a href="http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf">http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf</a>: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Use of improved sanitation facilities is low in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Among the 2.6 billion people in the world who do not use improved sanitation facilities, by far the greatest number are in Southern Asia, but there are also large numbers in Eastern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;61% of global population uses improved sanitation facilities</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Unless huge efforts are made, the proportion of people without access to basic sanitation will not be halved by 2015. Even if we meet the MDG target, there will still be 1.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation. If the trend remains as currently projected, an additional billion people who should have benefited from MDG progress will miss out, and by 2015, there will be 2.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;672 million people will still lack access to improved drinking-water sources in 2015.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Sub-Saharan Africa faces the greatest challenge in increasing the use of improved drinking-water. 884 million people &ndash; 37% of whom live in Sub&ndash;Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sources for drinking-water</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In China, 89% of the population of 1.3 billion uses drinking-water from improved sources, up from 67% in 1990. In India, 88% of the population of 1.2 billion uses drinking-water from such sources, as compared to 72% in 1990. China and India together account for a 47% share, of the 1.8 billion people that gained access to improved drinking-water sources between 1990 and 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For sanitation, even with the increase between 1990 and 2008 in the proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities in China (from 41% to 55%) and India (from 18% to 31%), the world is not on track to meet the sanitation target. This is despite the fact that 475 million people gained access to improved sanitation in these two countries alone, a 38% share of the 1.3 billion people that gained access globally.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the approximately 1.3 billion people who gained access to improved sanitation during the period 1990-2008, 64% live in urban areas.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Worldwide, 87% of the population gets their drinking-water from improved sources, and the corresponding figure for developing regions is also high at 84%. While 94% of the urban population of developing regions uses improved sources, it is only 76% of rural populations.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The rural population without access to an improved drinking-water source is over five times greater than that in urban areas. Of almost 1.8 billion people gaining access to improved drinking-water in the period 1990-2008, 59% live in urban areas. The urban-rural disparities are particularly striking in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are also visible in Asia and Latin America.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The proportion of the world population that practises open defecation declined by almost one third from 25% in 1990 to 17% in 2008. A decline in open defecation rates was recorded in all regions. In Sub-Saharan Africa, open defecation rates fell by 25 per cent. In absolute numbers, the population practising open defecation increased, however, from 188 million in 1990 to 224 million in 2008. In Southern Asia, home to 64% of the world population that defecate in the open, the practice decreased the most &ndash; from 66% in 1990 to 44% in 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 1990 and 2008, more than 1.2 billion people worldwide gained access to a piped connection on premises.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In developing regions, while 73% of the urban population uses piped water from a household connection, only 31% of rural inhabitants have access to household piped water supplies.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For families without a drinking-water source on the premises, it is usually women who go to the source to collect drinking-water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost two thirds of households, while in almost a quarter of households it is men who usually collect the water. In 12% of households, however, children carry the main responsibility for collecting water, with girls under 15 years of age being twice as likely to carry this responsibility as boys under the age of 15 years.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the study titled [inside]Combating Waterborne Disease at the Household Level (2007)[/inside], prepared by The International Network to Promote Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage and WHO, <a href="http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf">http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Globally, 1.1 billion lack access to an &ldquo;improved&rdquo; drinking water supply; many more drink water that is grossly contaminated.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4 billion cases of diarrhoea occur annually, of which 88% is attributable to unsafe water, and inadequate sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases, the vast majority children under 5. 90% of diarrhoeal deaths are borne by children under five, mostly in developing countries.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Lack of safe water perpetuates a cycle whereby poor populations become further disadvantaged, and poverty becomes entrenched.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; WHO estimates that 94% of diarrhoeal cases are preventable through modifications to the environment, including through interventions to increase the availability of clean water, and to improve sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A 2005 systematic review concluded that diarrhoeal episodes are reduced by 25% through improving water supply, 32% by improving sanitation, 45% through hand washing, and by 39% via household water treatment and safe storage.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A growing body of research suggests household water treatment and safe storage (HWTS):a. dramatically improves microbial water quality; b. significantly reduces diarrhoea; c. is among the most effective of water, sanitation and health interventions; d. is highly cost-effective; and e. can be rapidly deployed and taken up by vulnerable populations.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Existing low-cost technologies for safe drinking water are: a. Chlorination &ndash; adding chlorine in liquid or tablet form to drinking water stored in a protected container; b. Solar disinfection &ndash; exposing water in disposable clear plastic bottles to sunlight for a day, typically on the roof of a house; c. Filtration; d. Combined flocculation /disinfection systems&ndash;adding powders or tablets to coagulate and flocculate sediments in water followed by a timed release of disinfectant; e. boiling; f. Safe storage<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Many low-cost HWTS technologies do not come with clear labels and reliable accreditations attesting to their ability to provide &ldquo;safe&rdquo; water. This has led to uncertainty and confusion among consumers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]11th Five Year Plan[/inside]</span><br /> <a href="http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf</span></a>:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The status of provision of water and sanitation has improved slowly. According to Census 1991, 55.54% of the rural population had access to an improved water source. As on 1 April 2007, the Department of Drinking Water Supply&rsquo;s figures show that out of a total of 1,50,7349 rural habitations in the country, 74.39% (11,21,366 habitations) are fully covered and 14.64% (2,20,165 habitations) are partially covered. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;Present estimates shows that out of the 2.17 lakh water quality affected habitation as on 1.4.05, about 70,000 habitations have since been addressed for providing safe drinking water.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The access to toilets is even poorer. As per the latest Census data (2001), only 36.4% of the total population has latrines within or attached to their houses. However in rural areas, only 21.9% of population has latrines within or attached to their houses. An estimate based on the number of individual household toilets constructed under the TSC programme (a demand-driven programme implemented since 1999) puts the sanitation coverage in the country at about 49% (as on November 2007). </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;An evaluation study on the programme conducted in 2002 shows 80% of toilets constructed were put to use. This use is expected to be much higher as awareness has improved much since 2002.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The GoI&rsquo;s major intervention in water sector started in 1972&ndash;73 through Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) for assisting States/Uts to accelerate the coverage of drinking water supply. In 1986, the entire programme was given a mission approach with the launch of the Technology Mission on Drinking Water and Related Water Management. This Technology Mission was later renamed as Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991&ndash;92. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;In 1999, Department of Drinking Water Supply (DDWS) was formed under the MoRD to give emphasis to rural water supply as well as on sanitation. In the same year, new initiatives in water sector had been initiated through Sector Reform Project, later it was scaled up as Swajaldhara in 2002. With sustained interventions, DDWS remains an important institution to support the States/UTs in serving the rural population with water and sanitation related services all across India.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;There are about 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations in the country with more than half of the habitations affected with excess iron (118088). This is followed by fluoride (31306), salinity (23495), nitrate (13958), arsenic (5029) in that order. There are about 25000 habitations affected with multiple problems. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 States. Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam. The hand pump attached de-fluoridation and iron removal plants have failed due to in appropriate technology unsuited to community perceptions and their involvement. Desalination plants have also met a similar fate due to lapses at various levels starting with planning to post implementation maintenance.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;To &lsquo;provide clean drinking water for all by 2009 and ensure that there are no slip-backs by the end of the Eleventh Plan&rsquo; is one of the monitorable targets of the Eleventh Five Year Plan. The first part of the goal coincides with the terminal year of Bharat Nirman Programme under which it is proposed to provide safe drinking water to all habitations. Under the Bharat Nirman Programme 55,067 not covered habitations, 2.8 lakh slipped back habitations, and 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations are proposed to be covered.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">**page**</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">&nbsp; </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"><em>According to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS AND FIGURES&nbsp; *updated November 2004:</em> </span></span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases (including cholera); 90% are children under 5, mostly in developing countries. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;88% of diarrhoeal disease is attributed to unsafe water supply, inadequate sanitation and hygiene. Improved water supply reduces diarrhoea morbidity by between 6% to 25%, if severe outcomes are included. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improved sanitation reduces diarrhoea morbidity by 32%. Hygiene interventions including hygiene education and promotion of hand washing can lead to a reduction of diarrhoeal cases by up to 45%. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improvements in drinking-water quality through household water treatment, such as chlorination at point of use, can lead to a reduction of diarrhoea episodes by between 35% and 39%.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.3 million people die of malaria each year, 90% of whom are children under 5. There are 396 million episodes of malaria every year, most of the disease burden is in Africa south of the Sahara. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Intensified irrigation, dams and other water related projects contribute importantly to this disease burden. Better management of water resources reduces transmission of malaria and other vector-borne diseases.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world &iacute;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world&rsquo;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The development of water resources continues in an accelerated pace to meet the food, fibre and energy needs of a world population of 8 billion by 2025. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Lack of capacity for health impact assessment transfers hidden costs to the health sector and increases the disease burden on local communities. Environmental management approaches for health need to be incorporated into strategies for integrated water resources management.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => '', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 12, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-sanitation-55', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 55, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 25 $metaTitle = 'Environment | Water and Sanitation' $metaKeywords = '' $metaDesc = 'KEY TRENDS &nbsp; &bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural...' $disp = '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />&bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />&bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>environment/water-and-sanitation-55.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>Environment | Water and Sanitation | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content="KEY TRENDS • According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Water and Sanitation</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd) and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />• Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu & Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />• While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> <br />• Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>) </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a> to download</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more) </div><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $maxBufferLength = (int) 8192 $file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php' $line = (int) 853 $message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]Code Context$response->getStatusCode(),
($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')
));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67d312f341fff-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67d312f341fff-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67d312f341fff-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25, 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Report%20No.%209%20of%202021_GWMR_English-061c19df1d9dff7.23091105.pdf">click here</a> to access&nbsp;the [inside]Report no 9 of 2021: Performance Audit of Ground Water Management and Regulation for the period 2013-18 (laid on the floor of the Parliament on 21 December, 2021)[/inside]. Kindly <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/CAG%20Press%20Release%20Groundwater%2021%20Dec%202021.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1UNMLzOUev1axQLA4c-0XyJ5BEYk8mN7NshA-OPmNWf2pmfPd8jvGnc80">click here</a> to access the&nbsp;press release by CAG dated 21 December, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access the key findings of [inside]NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019)[/inside].<br /> <br /> Kindly <a href="mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Report_584_final.pdf">click here</a> to access the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019).<br /> <br /> According to the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019):<br /> <br /> &bull; The major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 48.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 57.5 percent of the households in the urban areas had exclusive access to principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 87.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 90.9 percent of the households in the urban areas had sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the principal source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 58.2 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 80.7 percent of the households in the urban areas had drinking water facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 94.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 97.4 percent of the households in the urban areas used &lsquo;improved source of drinking water&rsquo;.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 51.4 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 72.0 percent of the households in the urban areas used improved source of drinking water located in the household premises which was sufficiently available throughout the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 56.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to bathroom.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to bathroom, about 48.4 percent in the rural areas and about 74.8 percent in the urban areas used bathroom attached to the dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 71.3 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to latrine. It may be noted that there may be respondent bias in the reporting of access to latrine as question on benefits received by the households from government schemes was asked prior to the question on access of households to latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; The major type of latrine used by the households was flush/pour-flush to septic tank in both rural and urban areas. About 50.9 percent of the households in rural areas and 48.9 percent of the households in urban areas used flush/pour-flush to septic tank type of latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 94.7 percent of the males and 95.7 percent of the females in the rural areas used latrine regularly while about 98.0 percent of the males and 98.1 percent of the females in the urban areas used latrine regularly.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 93.8 percent of the males and 94.6 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine while about 97.2 percent of both males and females in the urban areas regularly used improved latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 85.8 percent of the males and 86.4 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine which was for exclusive use of the household while the corresponding figure was about 82.4 percent for males and 84.7 percent for females in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 3.5 percent of the household members in the rural areas and about 1.7 percent of the household members in the urban areas never used latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households used latrine, about 4.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 2.1 percent of the households in the urban areas reported that water was not available in or around the latrine used.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 48.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 86.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had bathroom and latrine both within household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 96.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 63.8 percent of the households in the urban areas had own dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 96.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.5 percent of the households in the urban areas used the house for residential purpose only.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 89.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 56.4 percent of the households in the urban areas had independent house.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 76.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.0 percent of the households in the urban areas had the house of pucca structure.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, average floor area of the dwelling unit was about 46.6 sq. mtr. in the rural areas and about 46.1 sq. mtr. in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 93.9 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 99.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had electricity for domestic use.<br /> <br /> <br /> **page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the [inside]CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit of National Rural Drinking Water Programme (published on 7th August, 2018)[/inside] in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) was launched with the objective of providing adequate safe water for drinking, cooking and other domestic needs to every rural person on a sustainable basis. The 12th Plan aimed at providing all rural habitations, schools and anganwadis with safe drinking water by December, 2017. It also envisaged that at least 50 percent of the rural population will be provided piped water supply at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) within the household premises or at a distance of not more than 100 meters from their households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP also aimed to provide household connection to 35 percent of rural households. The NRDWP is being implemented in the states through its six components and through other focused schemes. During the 12th FYP period (2012-17), a total of Rs. 89,956 crore (Central share of Rs. 43,691 crore and state share of Rs. 46,265 crore) was provided for the Programme of which&nbsp; Rs. 81,168 crore was spent during this period.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were set for achievement by 2017 viz. (i) all rural habitations, Government schools and anganwadis to have access to safe drinking water; (ii) 50 per cent of rural population to be provided potable drinking water (55 lpcd) by piped water supply; and (iii) 35 per cent of rural households to be provided household connections.<br /> <br /> &bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by eight percent at 40 lpcd and 5.5 percent at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP was an important element in Government of India&rsquo;s commitment to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal Number 6 which relates to ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.&nbsp; The Ministry had informed (September 2017) that while its objective was to provide drinking water to every Indian household, it would require approximately Rs. 23,000 crore annually till 2030 (at present cost) to achieve this goal and given the present level of outlays, the SDG cannot be realized solely through NRDWP efforts.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Planning and Delivery Mechanism:</em> The planning and delivery framework established at the Centre and states deviated from the NRDWP guidelines. Twenty one states did not frame Water Security Plans and deficiencies were found in preparation and scrutiny of Annual Action Plans such as lack of stakeholder and community participation, non-inclusion of minimum service level of water in schemes and absence of approval of State Level Scheme Sanctioning Committee for schemes included in the plans. The apex level National Drinking Water and Sanitation Council set up to co-ordinate and ensure convergence remained largely dormant. The agencies vital for planning and execution of the Programme such as State Water and Sanitation Mission, State Technical Agency, Source Finding Committee and Block Resource Centres were either not set up or were not performing their assigned functions. These constraints both in terms of planning and delivery ultimately affected achievement of Programme goals and targets.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Fund Management: </em>The NRDWP is implemented as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme with cost being shared between the Central and State Governments. The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation&rsquo;s expectations that the states would be able to compensate for reduced Central allocation by increasing their own financial commitment to the scheme taking into account the increased devolution based on the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission was belied. Thus, the overall availability of funds for the Programme declined during the period 2013-14 to 2016-17. However, even the reduced allocations of funds remained unutilised. There were&nbsp; delays of over 15 months in release of Central share to nodal/ implementing agencies. There was also diversion of funds towards inadmissible items of expenditure and blocking of funds amounting to Rs. 662.61 crore with State Water and Sanitation Missions and work executing agencies.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Programme Implementation:</em> The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were to be achieved by end of 2017 as brought out above. This was attributable partly to deficiencies in implementation such as incomplete, abandoned and non-operational works, unproductive expenditure on equipment, non-functional sustainability structures and gaps in contract management that had a total financial implication of Rs. 2,212.44 crore.<br /> <br /> &bull; Only five percent of quality affected habitations had been provided with Community Water Purification Plants and there was slow progress in setting up such plants out of funds provided by the NITI Aayog. Sustainability plans were either not prepared/ implemented or not included in the Annual Action Plans. There was inadequate focus on surface water based schemes and a large number of schemes&nbsp; (98 percent) including piped water schemes continued to be based on ground water resources. Operation and Maintenance plans were either not prepared in most of the states or had deficiencies leading to schemes becoming non-functional. As a result, incidence of slip-back habitations has persisted.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Lastly, lack of required number of labs at states/ district/ sub-divisional level resulted shortfall in prescribed quality tests of water sources and supply thereby compromising the objective of providing safe drinking water to the rural population.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Monitoring and Evaluation: </em>Data in the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) of the Programme lacked consistency and accuracy due to insufficient authentication and validation controls. The expert teams for inspection viz. Vigilance and Monitoring Committees to monitor and review implementation of NRDWP were either not established or were not functioning in the planned manner. Social audit of the programme to measure beneficiary level satisfaction was not conducted. Hence, the overall monitoring and oversight framework lacked effectiveness and there was inadequate community involvement in this exercise.<br /> &nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> Rural sanitation did not feature on the investment horizon during the first five plan periods as reflected in its negligible funding share. However, it received prominence from the Sixth Plan (1980-85) onwards amid the launch of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation decade in 1980, says the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf">51st Report of Standing Committee</a> on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin. India&rsquo;s first nationwide programme for rural sanitation, the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP), was launched in 1986, in the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) with the objective of improving the quality of life of rural people and to provide privacy and dignity to women. The programme provided large subsidy for construction of sanitary latrines for BPL households.<br /> <br /> The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), was launched with effect from 1st April, 1999 following a &lsquo;community led&rsquo; and &lsquo;people centered&rsquo; approach. The TSC moved away from the principle of state-wise allocation to a &ldquo;demand-driven&rdquo; approach. The programme laid emphasis on Information, Education and Communication (IEC) for generation of effective demand for sanitation facilities. It also laid emphasis on school sanitation and hygiene education for bringing about attitudinal and behavioral changes for adoption of hygienic practices from an early age.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> In order to encourage the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) to take up sanitation promotion, the incentive award scheme of Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP) was launched in 2005. The award was given to those PRIs which attained 100 percent open defecation free environment. This award publicized the sanitation programme significantly across the country.<br /> &nbsp;<br /> Encouraged by the initial success of NGP, and looking into the need to upscale sanitation interventions, the TSC was revamped as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) in 2012, with the objective to accelerate the sanitation coverage in rural areas so as to comprehensively cover rural population through renewed strategies and saturation approach and also to transform rural India into Nirmal Bharat.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> In order to significantly upscale the programme, and bring the nation&#39;s focus on the issue of sanitation, the Government of India had launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) viz. SMB (G) on 2nd October, 2014 to accelerate efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in the country by 2nd October, 2019. With the launch of SBM (G), the construction of toilets in schools and anganwadis has been mandated to the Ministry of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Women and Child Development respectively for greater focus.<br /> <br /> Under the SBM, the focus is on behavior change. Community based collective behavior change has been mentioned as the preferred approach, although the states are free to choose the approach best suited to them. Focus is also on creation of complete open defecation free (ODF) villages, rather than only on construction of individual toilets.<br /> <br /> The key findings of the [inside]51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018)[/inside], are as&nbsp; follows <em>(please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access)</em>:<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) was started in 2014 in rural areas of the country. The Cabinet approved the total estimated outlay of Rs. 1,34,386.61 crore for SBM (G). The financial burden of SBM (G) between the Centre and states is in the ratio of 60:40, with the exception of special category states where the share is 90:10. From 2014-15 to 2017-18, the central allocation made for SBM (G) has been Rs. 36,836.27 crore, of which Rs. 36,825.48 crore has been released to the states. For the financial year 2018-2019, an allocation of Rs. 30,343 crore has been made, with Rs. 7,509.82 crore already released to the states as of May 2018. The remaining Rs. 22,833.18 crore is planned to be released during the course of the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the time of launch of the SBM (G) on 2nd October, 2014, the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20in%20India%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage in India as on 24th May 2018">sanitation coverage in the country</a> was 38.7 percent. This has increased to 84.13 percent as on 24th May, 2018.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20across%20states%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage across states as on 24th May 2018">Sanitation coverage as on 24th May</a>, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; 386 districts, 3,578 blocks, 1,62,688 gram panchayats and 3,66,774 villages have been declared open defecation free (ODF) as on 24th May, 2018. As on 24th May, 2018, 17 states/ UTs namely Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Mizoram, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Meghalaya, Dadar &amp; Nagar Haveli, Daman &amp; Diu, Maharashtra &amp; Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands have been declared ODF. There are around 3 crore households pending as on 1st April, 2018, which are likely to be benefitted from this scheme in 2018-19.<br /> <br /> &bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20ODF%20villages%20across%20states.jpg" title="Proportion of ODF villages across states">proportion of villages</a>, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent).<br /> <br /> &bull; The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) through an Independent Verification Agency has done the National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey 2017-2018.&nbsp; In that survey, 92,040 households in 6,136 villages across all states were covered. The main findings of survey are: 1. Nearly 77 percent households in rural India have access to toilets <em>[the corresponding figure as per the SBM-G Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) at the midpoint of the survey period was 76 percent]</em>; 2. Roughly 93.4 percent of the households having access to a toilet use regularly; 3. Nearly 95.6 percent ODF verified villages confirmed ODF; 4. About 70 percent of the villages found to have minimal litter and stagnant water; 5. Roughly 70 percent villages found to have minimal stagnant water.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to the MDWS, the number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Household%20toilets%20constructed%20in%20India%20in%20lakhs.jpg" title="Household toilets constructed in India">household toilets constructed</a> was 58 lakhs in 2014-15, 126 lakhs in 2015-16, 218 lakhs in 2016-17 and 294 lakhs in 2017-18.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/State%20and%20UT%20wise%20IHHLs%20constructed%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="State and UT wise IHHLs constructed under SBM_Gramin">individual household latrines (IHHLs) </a>constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 7.2 crore. Most IHHL construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in Uttar Pradesh (around 98 lakhs), followed by Rajasthan (76.4 lakhs) and Madhya Pradesh (56.2 lakhs). As per the Cabinet Note, 9.72 crore IHHLs <em>(8.84 crore eligible for incentive and 0.88 crore non-eligible for APLs)</em> to be constructed under SBM (G), says the report.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20persons%20using%20toilets%20for%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202017-18.jpg" title="Proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets in 2017-18">National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey</a> (2017-18), the proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets was the lowest in Tamil Nadu (71.4 percent), followed by Puducherry (78.4 percent), Odisha (85.4 percent), Uttar Pradesh (87.9 percent) and Jharkhand (92.2 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.2 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20households%20having%20access%20to%20water%20for%20use%20in%20toilets%20out%20of%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202016_1.jpg" title="Proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets in 2016">Swachhata Status Report 2016</a> of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), the proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets was the lowest in Odisha (77.5 percent), followed by Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh (both 84.0 percent), Madhya Pradesh (89.2 percent), West Bengal (89.8 percent) and Bihar (90.0 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.9 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Community%20Sanitary%20Complexes.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Community Sanitary Complexes (CSC)</a> constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 10,002. Most number of CSCs construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in West Bengal (2,063), followed by Arunachal Pradesh (1,266), Jammu &amp; Kashmir (1,238), Himachal Pradesh (1,081) and Andhra Pradesh (616).<br /> <br /> &bull; The share of Central expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G) was Rs. 3,748.8 lakhs in 2014-15, Rs. 4,311.49 lakhs in 2015-16, Rs. 4,982.04 lakhs in 2016-17 and Rs. 7,484.69 lakhs in 2017-18. There is significant variation across the states in terms of Centre&#39;s share of expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G).&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Although the funds released under the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachh%20Bharat%20Kosh.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Swachh Bharat Kosh</a> of SBM (G) for Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands, Assam, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Odisha and Tripura was altogether Rs. 399.86 crore, the funds utilised as per the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) was Rs. 129.41 crore. It may be noted that the Swachh Bharat Kosh was set up in 2015 by the Ministry of Finance for channelizing the voluntary contribution from individuals and corporate sectors in response to the call given by Hon&#39;ble Prime Minister to achieve Swachh Bharat by 2nd October, 2019.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Unspent%20Balances%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="Unspent Balances under SBM_Gramin">Unspent balances</a> under the SBM (G) was Rs. -886.27 crore in 2015-16, Rs. -320.50 in 2016-17, Rs. 4,197.38 crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 9,890.84 crore in 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018)</em>. States like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances under the programme. As per the MDWS, the reasons for high unspent balance in some states under SBM (G) are: a. Inadequate capacity at grass root level; and b. Existence of revolving funds and leveraging other sources of credit. In its reply to a query by the Standing Committee, the MDWS has said that higher unspent balance in states automatically reduces their eligibility for further fund release in the subsequent year. Due to this specific modality and inbuilt provision in the SBM (G) guidelines, states observe better financial discipline. Strict monitoring methods are adopted to obtain the progress of each district on real time basis using the online monitoring system. Regular review meetings/ video conferences etc. are organized by the MDWS to discuss issues relating to implementation of the SBM (G) and utilization of funds&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; The Parliamentary Standing Committee has found out that during the year 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018) </em>there was huge unspent balance to the tune of Rs. 9,890.84 crore under the SBM (G). The Committee has observed that the problem of unspent balance is more prominent in certain states as compared to others. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report says that states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh Rs. 2,836.82 crore, in Bihar Rs. 2,764.62 crore, in Madhya Pradesh Rs. 866.68 crore, in Assam Rs. 606.30 crore, in Odisha Rs. 436.71 crore and in Andhra Pradesh Rs. 420.16 crore are lying unspent.<br /> <br /> &bull; The MDWS has claimed about 84 percent of sanitation coverage in the rural areas of India as on 24th May, 2018. However, contrary to the figures that was projected by the Ministry, the Parliamentary Standing Committee while examining the subject says that the sanitation coverage figures seemed to be more on &quot;paper&quot; but the actual progress at the ground level is very lethargic. Even a village with 100 percent household toilets cannot be declared ODF till all the inhabitants start using them, says the report. The main thrust of the government should be on the usage of toilets as mere building of toilets alone is not sufficient for the realization of actual vision of an ODF country.<br /> <br /> &bull; Much more is required to be done so as to bring in &quot;behavioural change&quot; in rural populace so as to attain the real motive behind the SBM (G), says the report. In the wake of this serious concern, the Standing Committee has recommended the MDWS to bring about a radical transformation in the &quot;behavioural&quot; aspects of the rural masses by inculcating in them a sense of hygiene and well-being through mass extensive awareness campaigns and other suitable mechanisms, so that the gap in the figures projected and the ground reality may be abridged for the betterment of the country.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Standing Committee has found that the performance of some of states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha in terms of sanitation is very poor. Appalled by the slackness of sanitation coverage in these states, the Committee enquired from the MDWS about the state of affairs. In response to that, the Ministry has informed that they are aware of it and have given special emphasis to the said states through various innovative measures. In this context, the Secretary of the MDWS candidly admitted before the Standing Committee about the dismal performance of bigger states and assured the Committee that the Government will take all necessary steps and will also provide extra budgetary resources to these states so as to improve the situation. The Parliamentary Standing Committee has observed that the efforts made by the government are not complete if the issue of awareness generation is left behind in this demand driven programme. The Committee has strongly recommended that the MDWS should pay more attention towards pace of sanitation in the low performing states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha on a war footing.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Committee is wary of the poor nature of construction and low quality of raw materials being used in the construction of toilets under SBM (G) as found by members themselves and through different feedbacks. The Committee has pressed upon the MDWS to ensure that the quality of raw materials used for construction of toilets under SBM (G) are of a good standard commensurate with the amount being spent as incentive to the beneficiaries without any compromise.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">A Rapid Survey on Swachhta Status was conducted by the NSSO during May-June 2015 alongside its regular 72nd Round (July 2014-June 2015) survey covering 3,788 villages and 2,907 urban blocks. The number of households surveyed was 73,176 in rural India and 41,538 in urban India.<br /> <br /> The survey aims to give a snapshot of the situation on the availability/ accessibility of toilets, solid waste and liquid waste management at sample village/ ward and household levels aggregated at state and country-levels.<br /> <br /> As per the report entitled [inside]Swachhta Status Report 2016[/inside], which has been prepared by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; Out of the 3788 villages surveyed, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose.<br /> <br /> &bull; From the 2,907 sample urban frame survey (UFS) blocks surveyed at all-India level, 42.0 percent wards were found to have community/ public toilets. At all India-level, 1.6 percent wards were found to be having the community /public toilets but not using them.<br /> <br /> &bull; In 54.9 percent of the villages having community toilets, cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the panchayat or on contract payment. In 17.0 percent villages, it was being done by the residents themselves. However, 22.6 percent villages were such where the community toilets were not being cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, cleaning of community/ public toilets was being done by the persons employed by the local municipal body in 73.1 percent wards having these toilets. 12.2 percent wards were such where the cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the residents&rsquo; welfare association. However, community/ public toilets in 8.6 percent wards were not being cleaned by anybody.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 36.8 percent wards in urban areas reported to have a proper liquid waste disposal system for community/ public toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 36.7 percent villages had pakki nali and 19.0 percent villages had katchi nali as drainage arrangement for waste water coming out of the rural households. 44.4 percent villages had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 56.4 percent wards reported to have sewer network for disposal of liquid waste.<br /> <br /> &bull; 78.1 percent wards reported to have a system of street cleaning.<br /> <br /> &bull; 64.2 percent wards were found to have a dumping place for solid waste. These solid waste dumping places were cleaned every day in case of 48.2 percent wards, on a weekly basis in case of 37.7 percent wards and on a monthly basis in case of 9.3 percent wards.&nbsp; However, 4.9 percent wards were such where the solid waste dumping place was not cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 50.5 percent of the households kept the garbage at a specified place outside their own house, 24.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the nearby agriculture field, 5.5 percent households kept it at the common place outside the house, 4.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the biogas plant or manure pit whereas 15.1 percent households threw it around the house.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 45.3 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, 88.8 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India for the households having sanitary toilet, percentage of persons using household/ community toilet was 95.6 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India for the households having sanitary toilet, the percentage of persons using household/ community/ public toilet was 98.7 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India, 42.5 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilet.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, 87.9 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 52.1 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 7.5 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 55.4 percent households contributed to open defecation. This percentage in urban areas was 8.9 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the [inside]Economic Survey 2015-16[/inside], Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>):<br /> <br /> &bull; The Census of India 2011 informs that around 70 percent of India&rsquo;s population (650 million) lives in rural and slum areas. It increases the possibility of exposure of the population to water-borne and vector-borne diseases<br /> <br /> &bull; Only 46.6 percent of households in India have access to drinking water within their premises. A far lower, 43.5 percent of households have access to tap water. Similarly, less than 50 percent households have latrine facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) is accelerating efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage and eliminate open defecation in India by 2 October 2019. It also aims to promote better hygiene amongst the population and improve cleanliness by initiating Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) projects in villages, towns and cities.<br /> <br /> &bull; The progress in sanitation has witnessed a spurt since the launch of the Swachh Bharat Mission. In its first year, i.e. from 2 October 2014 to 2 October 2015, 88 lakh toilets were constructed, against an expected outcome of 60 lakhs. More than 122 lakh toilets have already been constructed in rural areas so far under the mission. Sanitation coverage, which stood at 40.60 percent as per NSSO data, has risen to around 48.8 percent as on 31 December 2015.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme estimates, 61 percent of rural Indians defecate in the open in 2015, compared with only 32 per cent of rural people in sub-Saharan Africa. Even sanitation laggards perform better than India, with 17 percent rural open defecation in Afghanistan and 15 percent in Kenya.<br /> <br /> &bull; In order to improve availability of drinking water in rural areas, the National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) initiated a new project supported by the World Bank, the &lsquo;Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project&ndash;Low Income States&rsquo; with a total cost of Rs. 6000 crore. The project aims to provide safe, 24 x 7 piped drinking water supply to 7.8 million rural population in four low-income States--Assam, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand--that have the lowest piped water supply and sanitation facilities. As on 31 December 2015, the project has implemented 275 single and multi-village piped drinking water supply schemes through the decentralized delivery mechanism of empowered Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committees.<br /> <br /> **page**<br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the United Nations&#39; report entitled: [inside]Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014[/inside] (released in May 2014), (Please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Indian scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 92 million people in India and 112 million people in China without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 792 million people in India and 478 million people in China without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Globally, India continues to be the country with the highest number of people (597 million people) practicing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Despite having some of the highest numbers of open defecators, India (597 million people), Nigeria (39 million people) and Indonesia (54 million people) do not feature among those countries making the greatest strides in reducing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population practicing open defecation in India declined from 74 percent in 1990 to 63 percent in 2000 and further to 48 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in India rose from 18 percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2000 and further to 36 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in rural India was 25 percent whereas in urban India it was 60 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in India rose from 70 percent in 1990 to 81 percent in 2000 and further to 93 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in rural India was 91 percent whereas in urban India it was 97 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Global scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990, almost 2 billion people globally have gained access to improved sanitation, and 2.3 billion have gained access to drinking-water from improved sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Some 1.6 billion of these people have piped water connections in their homes or compounds.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; More than half of the global population lives in cities, and urban areas are still better supplied with improved water and sanitation than rural ones. But the gap is decreasing. In 1990, more than 76% people living in urban areas had access to improved sanitation, as opposed to only 28% in rural ones. By 2012, 80% urban dwellers and 47% rural ones had access to better sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 1990, 95% people in urban areas could drink improved water, compared with 62% people in rural ones. By 2012, 96% people living in towns and 82% of those in rural areas had access to improved water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2012, 116 countries had met the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target for drinking water, 77 had met the MDG target for sanitation and 56 countries had met both targets. MDG 7.C aims to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 89% of the global population used improved drinking water sources, a rise of 13 percentage points in 22 years or 2.3 billion people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 64% of the global population used improved sanitation facilities, a rise of 15 percentage points since 1990. Some 2.5 billion people &ndash; two-thirds of whom live in Asia, and a quarter in sub-Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sanitation facilities. There are 46 countries where at least half the population is not using an improved sanitation facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Although declining across all regions, open defecation is practised by 1 billion people, 82% of whom live in 10 countries. Nine out of 10 people defecating in the open live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Wealthy people universally have higher access to sanitation than the poor. In some countries this gap is narrowing. The gap is increasing, however, in rural areas of countries with low coverage and for marginalized and excluded groups.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 748 million people &ndash; 90% living in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia (43% in Sub-Saharan Africa, and 47% in Asia) &ndash; still use unimproved drinking water sources; 82% live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to access the salient findings of 69th Round of NSS regarding [inside]Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India (July 2012 to December 2012)[/inside].&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/NSS%2069th%20Round%20drinking%20water%20sanitation%20hygiene%20survey.pdf" title="NSS 69th round drinking water sanitation hygiene survey">click here</a> to download the full report Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th Round, July 2012-December 2012, MoSPI.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the [inside]WHO/UNICEF joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation[/inside],&nbsp;<a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf</a>, are as follows:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India with 626 million people who practice open defecation, has more than twice the number of the next 18 countries combined;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 90 per cent of the 692 million people in South Asia who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 593 million in China and 251 million in India gained access to improved sanitation since 1990.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; China and India account for just under half the global progress on sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Water</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2010, 89 per cent of the world&rsquo;s population, or 6.1 billion people, used improved drinking water sources, exceeding the MDG target (88 per cent); 92 per cent are expected to have access in 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2010, two billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Eleven per cent of the global population, or 783 million people, are still without access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2015 the WHO/UNICEF JMP projects that 605 million will still not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Sanitation</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 63 per cent of the global population use toilets and other improved sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2015, 67 per cent will have access to improved sanitation facilities (the MDG target is 75 per cent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 2.5 billion people lack improved sanitation, projected be 2.4 billion by 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 1.1 billion people (15 per cent of the global population) practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 949 million open defecators live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Countries that account for almost three-quarters of the people who practice open defecation:</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">India (626 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Indonesia (63 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Pakistan (40 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Ethiopia (38 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nigeria (34 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Sudan (19 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nepal (15 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">China (14 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Niger (12 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Burkina Faso (9.7 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Mozambique (9.5 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Cambodia (8.6 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the policy report titled [inside]Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011)[/inside], Water Aid,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf">http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has made a political commitment of reaching universal access to clean water by 2012. It has made the political commitment of reaching universal access to urban sanitation by 2012 and rural sanitation by 2017.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The population in India without access to water is 147.3 million. The population in India without access to sanitation is 818.4 million (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, 2010).&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008; however, the progress has been highly inequitable, with the poorest households barely benefiting. Only five million from the poorest section benefited compared with 43 million and 93 million from the richest sections.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Whereas every rural household in Sikkim and Kerala has access to sanitation, and states such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana and West Bengal have seen big improvements to access since 2001, in Bihar 73% of rural households lack adequate sanitation, and across India almost a third of the rural population does not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The five countries with the largest absolute numbers of people without sanitation&ndash;India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan&ndash;are all middle income and account for over 1.7 billion people without sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; WaterAid research in India illustrates how scheduled castes are denied access to water facilities and how scheduled caste children are not allowed to drink water from common sources at school.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India and China were top 10 recipients for clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) aid for nine and eight years respectively, which is consistent with the fact that these two countries are home to the greatest number of people without water and sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In India, the cost of construction of Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs) in the Total Sanitation Campaign is expected to be met by Above Poverty Line households, while for Below Poverty Line households, the cost is shared between the Government of India, the state and individual users, with the exact ratio depending on the unit cost of the facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Diarrhoea, 88 percent of which is caused due to lack of access to clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), is now the biggest killer of children in Africa and the second biggest killer of children worldwide. It is responsible for 2.2 million deaths each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Lack of access to water and sanitation is a major drag on economic growth, and costs African and Asian countries up to 6% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Poor people in South Asia are over 13 times less likely to have access to sanitation than the rich; and poor people in Sub-Saharan Africa are over 15 times more likely to practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There is a rural-urban divide in access to clean water and sanitation. 94% of the urban population in developing countries has access to clean water, compared to 76% &nbsp;in rural areas, and 68% of the urban population has access to improved sanitation, compared with only 40% in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; For families without a drinking-water source at home, it is usually women and girls who go to collect drinking water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost three-quarters of households.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Historically, local natural monopolies have been in public ownership, and about 90% of the world&rsquo;s piped water is delivered by publicly-owned bodies, at both national and municipal levels.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Increasing overall WASH spending to 3.5% of GDP and sanitation to 1% are very large changes from current levels&mdash;but this is the scale of change that is needed if the MDG targets are to be achieved in all regions and LDCs are to get on course for universal access by 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations[/inside] by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010<br /> <a href="http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf">http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Young children are most at risk of death from unsafe water, and women and children are typically responsible for most water collection.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Multiple randomized trials show that water treatment can cost-effectively reduce reported diarrhea. However, many consumers have low willingness to pay for cleaner water, with less than 10% of households purchasing household water treatment under existing retail models.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Provision of information on water quality can increase demand, but only modestly. Free point of collection water treatment systems designed to make water treatment convenient, salient, and public, combined with a local promoter, can generate take up of more than 60 percent. The projected cost is as low as $20 per year of life saved, comparable to vaccines. In contrast, the limited existing evidence suggests many consumers are willing to pay for better access to water, but it does not yet demonstrate that this improves health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Providing dilute chlorine solution free at the point of water collection, together with a local promoter, can increase take up of water treatment from less than 10 percent to more than 60 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Evidence available from randomized studies suggests that consumers realize substantial non-health benefits from convenient access to water and are willing to pay for this.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Separately identifying how water quantity and quality affect health is important because different water interventions affect water quality and quantity asymmetrically. For example, adding chlorine to water affects quality but not quantity. On the other hand, providing household connections to municipal water supplies to households that currently use standpipes is likely to have a bigger effect on the convenience of obtaining water, and thus on the quantity of water consumed, than on water quality.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Increased availability and convenience of water facilitates more frequent washing of hands, dishes, bodies and clothes, thus reducing disease transmission. There is indeed strong evidence that hand washing is important for health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent collection of self-reported diarrhea data through repeated interviews leads to health protective behavior change in addition to respondent fatigue and social desirability bias.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent data collection leads to lower reports of child diarrhea by mothers relative to infrequent surveying and also to higher rates of chlorination verified by tests for chlorine in water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page** </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09 (released in 2010)[/inside], National Sample Survey, <a href="http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf">http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The field work of the nationwide survey was carried out during July 2008 to June 2009. The report is based on the Central sample of 1,53,518 households (97,144 in rural areas and 56,374 in urban areas) surveyed from 8,130 sample villages in rural areas and 4,735 urban blocks spread over all States and Union Territories.<br /> <br /> <em>Availability of Drinking Water Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas the major source of drinking water (most often used) was &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; in respect of 55 per cent of households followed by &lsquo;tap&rsquo; for 30 per cent of households.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, &lsquo;tap&rsquo; was the major source of drinking water for 74 per cent of the households and &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; served another 18 per cent households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The three sources of drinking water, &lsquo;tap&rsquo;, &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; and &lsquo;well&rsquo; together served nearly 97 per cent of rural households and 95 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 86 per cent of the rural households and 91 per cent of urban households got sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the first major source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Shortage of drinking water set in the month of March and gradually reached a peak during May; thereafter, the situation of availability of drinking water gradually improved and by August the situation improved substantially.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the month of May drinking water for 13 per cent of the rural households and 8 per cent of the urban households was insufficient.<br /> <br /> &bull; Drinking water facility within the premises was available to nearly 41 per cent of rural households and 75 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> <em>Bathroom Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Bathroom facility was not available to nearly 64 per cent of rural households, while in urban areas, the proportion of households with no bathroom was lower, nearly 22 per cent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In the rural areas, detached bathrooms were more common (23 per cent of the households) than were attached bathrooms (13 per cent of the households).<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, a higher proportion of households (48 per cent) had attached bathroom than detached bathroom (nearly 31 per cent).<br /> <br /> <em>Sanitation Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility whereas 11 per cent of urban households did not have any latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 14 per cent of the households in rural areas and 8 per cent in urban areas used pit latrine.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull; In rural areas, septic tank/flush latrine was used by 18 per cent households as compared to 77 per cent households in urban areas.</span><br /> <br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>Electricity Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; At the all-India level, nearly 75 per cent of the households had electricity for domestic use. While 66 per cent households in rural areas had this facility, 96 per cent in urban areas had the facility.<br /> <br /> <em>Households With Three Basic Facilities: Drinking Water Within Premises, Latrine and Electricity </em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) whereas in urban areas, all three facilities were available to 68 per cent households.<br /> <br /> <em>Micro Environmental Elements Surrounding the House</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 19 per cent of the households in rural areas and 6 per cent in urban areas had open katcha drainage. Nearly 57 per cent of the households in rural areas and 15 per cent in urban areas had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Garbage disposal arrangement was available to only 24 per cent of rural households and 79 per cent of the urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of the rural households and 6 per cent of the urban households had no direct opening to road.</span><br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update (WHO and UNICEF)[/inside], <a href="http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf">http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf</a>: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Use of improved sanitation facilities is low in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Among the 2.6 billion people in the world who do not use improved sanitation facilities, by far the greatest number are in Southern Asia, but there are also large numbers in Eastern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;61% of global population uses improved sanitation facilities</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Unless huge efforts are made, the proportion of people without access to basic sanitation will not be halved by 2015. Even if we meet the MDG target, there will still be 1.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation. If the trend remains as currently projected, an additional billion people who should have benefited from MDG progress will miss out, and by 2015, there will be 2.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;672 million people will still lack access to improved drinking-water sources in 2015.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Sub-Saharan Africa faces the greatest challenge in increasing the use of improved drinking-water. 884 million people &ndash; 37% of whom live in Sub&ndash;Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sources for drinking-water</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In China, 89% of the population of 1.3 billion uses drinking-water from improved sources, up from 67% in 1990. In India, 88% of the population of 1.2 billion uses drinking-water from such sources, as compared to 72% in 1990. China and India together account for a 47% share, of the 1.8 billion people that gained access to improved drinking-water sources between 1990 and 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For sanitation, even with the increase between 1990 and 2008 in the proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities in China (from 41% to 55%) and India (from 18% to 31%), the world is not on track to meet the sanitation target. This is despite the fact that 475 million people gained access to improved sanitation in these two countries alone, a 38% share of the 1.3 billion people that gained access globally.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the approximately 1.3 billion people who gained access to improved sanitation during the period 1990-2008, 64% live in urban areas.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Worldwide, 87% of the population gets their drinking-water from improved sources, and the corresponding figure for developing regions is also high at 84%. While 94% of the urban population of developing regions uses improved sources, it is only 76% of rural populations.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The rural population without access to an improved drinking-water source is over five times greater than that in urban areas. Of almost 1.8 billion people gaining access to improved drinking-water in the period 1990-2008, 59% live in urban areas. The urban-rural disparities are particularly striking in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are also visible in Asia and Latin America.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The proportion of the world population that practises open defecation declined by almost one third from 25% in 1990 to 17% in 2008. A decline in open defecation rates was recorded in all regions. In Sub-Saharan Africa, open defecation rates fell by 25 per cent. In absolute numbers, the population practising open defecation increased, however, from 188 million in 1990 to 224 million in 2008. In Southern Asia, home to 64% of the world population that defecate in the open, the practice decreased the most &ndash; from 66% in 1990 to 44% in 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 1990 and 2008, more than 1.2 billion people worldwide gained access to a piped connection on premises.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In developing regions, while 73% of the urban population uses piped water from a household connection, only 31% of rural inhabitants have access to household piped water supplies.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For families without a drinking-water source on the premises, it is usually women who go to the source to collect drinking-water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost two thirds of households, while in almost a quarter of households it is men who usually collect the water. In 12% of households, however, children carry the main responsibility for collecting water, with girls under 15 years of age being twice as likely to carry this responsibility as boys under the age of 15 years.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the study titled [inside]Combating Waterborne Disease at the Household Level (2007)[/inside], prepared by The International Network to Promote Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage and WHO, <a href="http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf">http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Globally, 1.1 billion lack access to an &ldquo;improved&rdquo; drinking water supply; many more drink water that is grossly contaminated.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4 billion cases of diarrhoea occur annually, of which 88% is attributable to unsafe water, and inadequate sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases, the vast majority children under 5. 90% of diarrhoeal deaths are borne by children under five, mostly in developing countries.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Lack of safe water perpetuates a cycle whereby poor populations become further disadvantaged, and poverty becomes entrenched.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; WHO estimates that 94% of diarrhoeal cases are preventable through modifications to the environment, including through interventions to increase the availability of clean water, and to improve sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A 2005 systematic review concluded that diarrhoeal episodes are reduced by 25% through improving water supply, 32% by improving sanitation, 45% through hand washing, and by 39% via household water treatment and safe storage.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A growing body of research suggests household water treatment and safe storage (HWTS):a. dramatically improves microbial water quality; b. significantly reduces diarrhoea; c. is among the most effective of water, sanitation and health interventions; d. is highly cost-effective; and e. can be rapidly deployed and taken up by vulnerable populations.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Existing low-cost technologies for safe drinking water are: a. Chlorination &ndash; adding chlorine in liquid or tablet form to drinking water stored in a protected container; b. Solar disinfection &ndash; exposing water in disposable clear plastic bottles to sunlight for a day, typically on the roof of a house; c. Filtration; d. Combined flocculation /disinfection systems&ndash;adding powders or tablets to coagulate and flocculate sediments in water followed by a timed release of disinfectant; e. boiling; f. Safe storage<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Many low-cost HWTS technologies do not come with clear labels and reliable accreditations attesting to their ability to provide &ldquo;safe&rdquo; water. This has led to uncertainty and confusion among consumers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]11th Five Year Plan[/inside]</span><br /> <a href="http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf</span></a>:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The status of provision of water and sanitation has improved slowly. According to Census 1991, 55.54% of the rural population had access to an improved water source. As on 1 April 2007, the Department of Drinking Water Supply&rsquo;s figures show that out of a total of 1,50,7349 rural habitations in the country, 74.39% (11,21,366 habitations) are fully covered and 14.64% (2,20,165 habitations) are partially covered. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;Present estimates shows that out of the 2.17 lakh water quality affected habitation as on 1.4.05, about 70,000 habitations have since been addressed for providing safe drinking water.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The access to toilets is even poorer. As per the latest Census data (2001), only 36.4% of the total population has latrines within or attached to their houses. However in rural areas, only 21.9% of population has latrines within or attached to their houses. An estimate based on the number of individual household toilets constructed under the TSC programme (a demand-driven programme implemented since 1999) puts the sanitation coverage in the country at about 49% (as on November 2007). </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;An evaluation study on the programme conducted in 2002 shows 80% of toilets constructed were put to use. This use is expected to be much higher as awareness has improved much since 2002.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The GoI&rsquo;s major intervention in water sector started in 1972&ndash;73 through Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) for assisting States/Uts to accelerate the coverage of drinking water supply. In 1986, the entire programme was given a mission approach with the launch of the Technology Mission on Drinking Water and Related Water Management. This Technology Mission was later renamed as Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991&ndash;92. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;In 1999, Department of Drinking Water Supply (DDWS) was formed under the MoRD to give emphasis to rural water supply as well as on sanitation. In the same year, new initiatives in water sector had been initiated through Sector Reform Project, later it was scaled up as Swajaldhara in 2002. With sustained interventions, DDWS remains an important institution to support the States/UTs in serving the rural population with water and sanitation related services all across India.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;There are about 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations in the country with more than half of the habitations affected with excess iron (118088). This is followed by fluoride (31306), salinity (23495), nitrate (13958), arsenic (5029) in that order. There are about 25000 habitations affected with multiple problems. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 States. Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam. The hand pump attached de-fluoridation and iron removal plants have failed due to in appropriate technology unsuited to community perceptions and their involvement. Desalination plants have also met a similar fate due to lapses at various levels starting with planning to post implementation maintenance.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;To &lsquo;provide clean drinking water for all by 2009 and ensure that there are no slip-backs by the end of the Eleventh Plan&rsquo; is one of the monitorable targets of the Eleventh Five Year Plan. The first part of the goal coincides with the terminal year of Bharat Nirman Programme under which it is proposed to provide safe drinking water to all habitations. Under the Bharat Nirman Programme 55,067 not covered habitations, 2.8 lakh slipped back habitations, and 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations are proposed to be covered.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">**page**</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">&nbsp; </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"><em>According to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS AND FIGURES&nbsp; *updated November 2004:</em> </span></span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases (including cholera); 90% are children under 5, mostly in developing countries. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;88% of diarrhoeal disease is attributed to unsafe water supply, inadequate sanitation and hygiene. Improved water supply reduces diarrhoea morbidity by between 6% to 25%, if severe outcomes are included. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improved sanitation reduces diarrhoea morbidity by 32%. Hygiene interventions including hygiene education and promotion of hand washing can lead to a reduction of diarrhoeal cases by up to 45%. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improvements in drinking-water quality through household water treatment, such as chlorination at point of use, can lead to a reduction of diarrhoea episodes by between 35% and 39%.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.3 million people die of malaria each year, 90% of whom are children under 5. There are 396 million episodes of malaria every year, most of the disease burden is in Africa south of the Sahara. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Intensified irrigation, dams and other water related projects contribute importantly to this disease burden. Better management of water resources reduces transmission of malaria and other vector-borne diseases.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world &iacute;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world&rsquo;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The development of water resources continues in an accelerated pace to meet the food, fibre and energy needs of a world population of 8 billion by 2025. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Lack of capacity for health impact assessment transfers hidden costs to the health sector and increases the disease burden on local communities. Environmental management approaches for health need to be incorporated into strategies for integrated water resources management.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => '', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 12, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-sanitation-55', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 55, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [[maximum depth reached]], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 25, 'metaTitle' => 'Environment | Water and Sanitation', 'metaKeywords' => '', 'metaDesc' => 'KEY TRENDS &nbsp; &bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural...', 'disp' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />&bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />&bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25, 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Report%20No.%209%20of%202021_GWMR_English-061c19df1d9dff7.23091105.pdf">click here</a> to access&nbsp;the [inside]Report no 9 of 2021: Performance Audit of Ground Water Management and Regulation for the period 2013-18 (laid on the floor of the Parliament on 21 December, 2021)[/inside]. Kindly <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/CAG%20Press%20Release%20Groundwater%2021%20Dec%202021.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1UNMLzOUev1axQLA4c-0XyJ5BEYk8mN7NshA-OPmNWf2pmfPd8jvGnc80">click here</a> to access the&nbsp;press release by CAG dated 21 December, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access the key findings of [inside]NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019)[/inside].<br /> <br /> Kindly <a href="mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Report_584_final.pdf">click here</a> to access the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019).<br /> <br /> According to the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019):<br /> <br /> &bull; The major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 48.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 57.5 percent of the households in the urban areas had exclusive access to principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 87.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 90.9 percent of the households in the urban areas had sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the principal source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 58.2 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 80.7 percent of the households in the urban areas had drinking water facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 94.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 97.4 percent of the households in the urban areas used &lsquo;improved source of drinking water&rsquo;.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 51.4 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 72.0 percent of the households in the urban areas used improved source of drinking water located in the household premises which was sufficiently available throughout the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 56.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to bathroom.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to bathroom, about 48.4 percent in the rural areas and about 74.8 percent in the urban areas used bathroom attached to the dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 71.3 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to latrine. It may be noted that there may be respondent bias in the reporting of access to latrine as question on benefits received by the households from government schemes was asked prior to the question on access of households to latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; The major type of latrine used by the households was flush/pour-flush to septic tank in both rural and urban areas. About 50.9 percent of the households in rural areas and 48.9 percent of the households in urban areas used flush/pour-flush to septic tank type of latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 94.7 percent of the males and 95.7 percent of the females in the rural areas used latrine regularly while about 98.0 percent of the males and 98.1 percent of the females in the urban areas used latrine regularly.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 93.8 percent of the males and 94.6 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine while about 97.2 percent of both males and females in the urban areas regularly used improved latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 85.8 percent of the males and 86.4 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine which was for exclusive use of the household while the corresponding figure was about 82.4 percent for males and 84.7 percent for females in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 3.5 percent of the household members in the rural areas and about 1.7 percent of the household members in the urban areas never used latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households used latrine, about 4.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 2.1 percent of the households in the urban areas reported that water was not available in or around the latrine used.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 48.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 86.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had bathroom and latrine both within household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 96.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 63.8 percent of the households in the urban areas had own dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 96.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.5 percent of the households in the urban areas used the house for residential purpose only.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 89.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 56.4 percent of the households in the urban areas had independent house.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 76.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.0 percent of the households in the urban areas had the house of pucca structure.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, average floor area of the dwelling unit was about 46.6 sq. mtr. in the rural areas and about 46.1 sq. mtr. in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 93.9 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 99.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had electricity for domestic use.<br /> <br /> <br /> **page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the [inside]CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit of National Rural Drinking Water Programme (published on 7th August, 2018)[/inside] in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) was launched with the objective of providing adequate safe water for drinking, cooking and other domestic needs to every rural person on a sustainable basis. The 12th Plan aimed at providing all rural habitations, schools and anganwadis with safe drinking water by December, 2017. It also envisaged that at least 50 percent of the rural population will be provided piped water supply at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) within the household premises or at a distance of not more than 100 meters from their households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP also aimed to provide household connection to 35 percent of rural households. The NRDWP is being implemented in the states through its six components and through other focused schemes. During the 12th FYP period (2012-17), a total of Rs. 89,956 crore (Central share of Rs. 43,691 crore and state share of Rs. 46,265 crore) was provided for the Programme of which&nbsp; Rs. 81,168 crore was spent during this period.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were set for achievement by 2017 viz. (i) all rural habitations, Government schools and anganwadis to have access to safe drinking water; (ii) 50 per cent of rural population to be provided potable drinking water (55 lpcd) by piped water supply; and (iii) 35 per cent of rural households to be provided household connections.<br /> <br /> &bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by eight percent at 40 lpcd and 5.5 percent at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP was an important element in Government of India&rsquo;s commitment to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal Number 6 which relates to ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.&nbsp; The Ministry had informed (September 2017) that while its objective was to provide drinking water to every Indian household, it would require approximately Rs. 23,000 crore annually till 2030 (at present cost) to achieve this goal and given the present level of outlays, the SDG cannot be realized solely through NRDWP efforts.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Planning and Delivery Mechanism:</em> The planning and delivery framework established at the Centre and states deviated from the NRDWP guidelines. Twenty one states did not frame Water Security Plans and deficiencies were found in preparation and scrutiny of Annual Action Plans such as lack of stakeholder and community participation, non-inclusion of minimum service level of water in schemes and absence of approval of State Level Scheme Sanctioning Committee for schemes included in the plans. The apex level National Drinking Water and Sanitation Council set up to co-ordinate and ensure convergence remained largely dormant. The agencies vital for planning and execution of the Programme such as State Water and Sanitation Mission, State Technical Agency, Source Finding Committee and Block Resource Centres were either not set up or were not performing their assigned functions. These constraints both in terms of planning and delivery ultimately affected achievement of Programme goals and targets.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Fund Management: </em>The NRDWP is implemented as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme with cost being shared between the Central and State Governments. The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation&rsquo;s expectations that the states would be able to compensate for reduced Central allocation by increasing their own financial commitment to the scheme taking into account the increased devolution based on the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission was belied. Thus, the overall availability of funds for the Programme declined during the period 2013-14 to 2016-17. However, even the reduced allocations of funds remained unutilised. There were&nbsp; delays of over 15 months in release of Central share to nodal/ implementing agencies. There was also diversion of funds towards inadmissible items of expenditure and blocking of funds amounting to Rs. 662.61 crore with State Water and Sanitation Missions and work executing agencies.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Programme Implementation:</em> The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were to be achieved by end of 2017 as brought out above. This was attributable partly to deficiencies in implementation such as incomplete, abandoned and non-operational works, unproductive expenditure on equipment, non-functional sustainability structures and gaps in contract management that had a total financial implication of Rs. 2,212.44 crore.<br /> <br /> &bull; Only five percent of quality affected habitations had been provided with Community Water Purification Plants and there was slow progress in setting up such plants out of funds provided by the NITI Aayog. Sustainability plans were either not prepared/ implemented or not included in the Annual Action Plans. There was inadequate focus on surface water based schemes and a large number of schemes&nbsp; (98 percent) including piped water schemes continued to be based on ground water resources. Operation and Maintenance plans were either not prepared in most of the states or had deficiencies leading to schemes becoming non-functional. As a result, incidence of slip-back habitations has persisted.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Lastly, lack of required number of labs at states/ district/ sub-divisional level resulted shortfall in prescribed quality tests of water sources and supply thereby compromising the objective of providing safe drinking water to the rural population.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Monitoring and Evaluation: </em>Data in the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) of the Programme lacked consistency and accuracy due to insufficient authentication and validation controls. The expert teams for inspection viz. Vigilance and Monitoring Committees to monitor and review implementation of NRDWP were either not established or were not functioning in the planned manner. Social audit of the programme to measure beneficiary level satisfaction was not conducted. Hence, the overall monitoring and oversight framework lacked effectiveness and there was inadequate community involvement in this exercise.<br /> &nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> Rural sanitation did not feature on the investment horizon during the first five plan periods as reflected in its negligible funding share. However, it received prominence from the Sixth Plan (1980-85) onwards amid the launch of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation decade in 1980, says the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf">51st Report of Standing Committee</a> on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin. India&rsquo;s first nationwide programme for rural sanitation, the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP), was launched in 1986, in the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) with the objective of improving the quality of life of rural people and to provide privacy and dignity to women. The programme provided large subsidy for construction of sanitary latrines for BPL households.<br /> <br /> The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), was launched with effect from 1st April, 1999 following a &lsquo;community led&rsquo; and &lsquo;people centered&rsquo; approach. The TSC moved away from the principle of state-wise allocation to a &ldquo;demand-driven&rdquo; approach. The programme laid emphasis on Information, Education and Communication (IEC) for generation of effective demand for sanitation facilities. It also laid emphasis on school sanitation and hygiene education for bringing about attitudinal and behavioral changes for adoption of hygienic practices from an early age.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> In order to encourage the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) to take up sanitation promotion, the incentive award scheme of Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP) was launched in 2005. The award was given to those PRIs which attained 100 percent open defecation free environment. This award publicized the sanitation programme significantly across the country.<br /> &nbsp;<br /> Encouraged by the initial success of NGP, and looking into the need to upscale sanitation interventions, the TSC was revamped as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) in 2012, with the objective to accelerate the sanitation coverage in rural areas so as to comprehensively cover rural population through renewed strategies and saturation approach and also to transform rural India into Nirmal Bharat.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> In order to significantly upscale the programme, and bring the nation&#39;s focus on the issue of sanitation, the Government of India had launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) viz. SMB (G) on 2nd October, 2014 to accelerate efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in the country by 2nd October, 2019. With the launch of SBM (G), the construction of toilets in schools and anganwadis has been mandated to the Ministry of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Women and Child Development respectively for greater focus.<br /> <br /> Under the SBM, the focus is on behavior change. Community based collective behavior change has been mentioned as the preferred approach, although the states are free to choose the approach best suited to them. Focus is also on creation of complete open defecation free (ODF) villages, rather than only on construction of individual toilets.<br /> <br /> The key findings of the [inside]51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018)[/inside], are as&nbsp; follows <em>(please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access)</em>:<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) was started in 2014 in rural areas of the country. The Cabinet approved the total estimated outlay of Rs. 1,34,386.61 crore for SBM (G). The financial burden of SBM (G) between the Centre and states is in the ratio of 60:40, with the exception of special category states where the share is 90:10. From 2014-15 to 2017-18, the central allocation made for SBM (G) has been Rs. 36,836.27 crore, of which Rs. 36,825.48 crore has been released to the states. For the financial year 2018-2019, an allocation of Rs. 30,343 crore has been made, with Rs. 7,509.82 crore already released to the states as of May 2018. The remaining Rs. 22,833.18 crore is planned to be released during the course of the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the time of launch of the SBM (G) on 2nd October, 2014, the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20in%20India%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage in India as on 24th May 2018">sanitation coverage in the country</a> was 38.7 percent. This has increased to 84.13 percent as on 24th May, 2018.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20across%20states%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage across states as on 24th May 2018">Sanitation coverage as on 24th May</a>, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; 386 districts, 3,578 blocks, 1,62,688 gram panchayats and 3,66,774 villages have been declared open defecation free (ODF) as on 24th May, 2018. As on 24th May, 2018, 17 states/ UTs namely Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Mizoram, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Meghalaya, Dadar &amp; Nagar Haveli, Daman &amp; Diu, Maharashtra &amp; Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands have been declared ODF. There are around 3 crore households pending as on 1st April, 2018, which are likely to be benefitted from this scheme in 2018-19.<br /> <br /> &bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20ODF%20villages%20across%20states.jpg" title="Proportion of ODF villages across states">proportion of villages</a>, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent).<br /> <br /> &bull; The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) through an Independent Verification Agency has done the National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey 2017-2018.&nbsp; In that survey, 92,040 households in 6,136 villages across all states were covered. The main findings of survey are: 1. Nearly 77 percent households in rural India have access to toilets <em>[the corresponding figure as per the SBM-G Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) at the midpoint of the survey period was 76 percent]</em>; 2. Roughly 93.4 percent of the households having access to a toilet use regularly; 3. Nearly 95.6 percent ODF verified villages confirmed ODF; 4. About 70 percent of the villages found to have minimal litter and stagnant water; 5. Roughly 70 percent villages found to have minimal stagnant water.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to the MDWS, the number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Household%20toilets%20constructed%20in%20India%20in%20lakhs.jpg" title="Household toilets constructed in India">household toilets constructed</a> was 58 lakhs in 2014-15, 126 lakhs in 2015-16, 218 lakhs in 2016-17 and 294 lakhs in 2017-18.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/State%20and%20UT%20wise%20IHHLs%20constructed%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="State and UT wise IHHLs constructed under SBM_Gramin">individual household latrines (IHHLs) </a>constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 7.2 crore. Most IHHL construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in Uttar Pradesh (around 98 lakhs), followed by Rajasthan (76.4 lakhs) and Madhya Pradesh (56.2 lakhs). As per the Cabinet Note, 9.72 crore IHHLs <em>(8.84 crore eligible for incentive and 0.88 crore non-eligible for APLs)</em> to be constructed under SBM (G), says the report.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20persons%20using%20toilets%20for%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202017-18.jpg" title="Proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets in 2017-18">National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey</a> (2017-18), the proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets was the lowest in Tamil Nadu (71.4 percent), followed by Puducherry (78.4 percent), Odisha (85.4 percent), Uttar Pradesh (87.9 percent) and Jharkhand (92.2 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.2 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20households%20having%20access%20to%20water%20for%20use%20in%20toilets%20out%20of%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202016_1.jpg" title="Proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets in 2016">Swachhata Status Report 2016</a> of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), the proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets was the lowest in Odisha (77.5 percent), followed by Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh (both 84.0 percent), Madhya Pradesh (89.2 percent), West Bengal (89.8 percent) and Bihar (90.0 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.9 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Community%20Sanitary%20Complexes.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Community Sanitary Complexes (CSC)</a> constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 10,002. Most number of CSCs construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in West Bengal (2,063), followed by Arunachal Pradesh (1,266), Jammu &amp; Kashmir (1,238), Himachal Pradesh (1,081) and Andhra Pradesh (616).<br /> <br /> &bull; The share of Central expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G) was Rs. 3,748.8 lakhs in 2014-15, Rs. 4,311.49 lakhs in 2015-16, Rs. 4,982.04 lakhs in 2016-17 and Rs. 7,484.69 lakhs in 2017-18. There is significant variation across the states in terms of Centre&#39;s share of expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G).&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Although the funds released under the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachh%20Bharat%20Kosh.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Swachh Bharat Kosh</a> of SBM (G) for Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands, Assam, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Odisha and Tripura was altogether Rs. 399.86 crore, the funds utilised as per the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) was Rs. 129.41 crore. It may be noted that the Swachh Bharat Kosh was set up in 2015 by the Ministry of Finance for channelizing the voluntary contribution from individuals and corporate sectors in response to the call given by Hon&#39;ble Prime Minister to achieve Swachh Bharat by 2nd October, 2019.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Unspent%20Balances%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="Unspent Balances under SBM_Gramin">Unspent balances</a> under the SBM (G) was Rs. -886.27 crore in 2015-16, Rs. -320.50 in 2016-17, Rs. 4,197.38 crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 9,890.84 crore in 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018)</em>. States like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances under the programme. As per the MDWS, the reasons for high unspent balance in some states under SBM (G) are: a. Inadequate capacity at grass root level; and b. Existence of revolving funds and leveraging other sources of credit. In its reply to a query by the Standing Committee, the MDWS has said that higher unspent balance in states automatically reduces their eligibility for further fund release in the subsequent year. Due to this specific modality and inbuilt provision in the SBM (G) guidelines, states observe better financial discipline. Strict monitoring methods are adopted to obtain the progress of each district on real time basis using the online monitoring system. Regular review meetings/ video conferences etc. are organized by the MDWS to discuss issues relating to implementation of the SBM (G) and utilization of funds&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; The Parliamentary Standing Committee has found out that during the year 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018) </em>there was huge unspent balance to the tune of Rs. 9,890.84 crore under the SBM (G). The Committee has observed that the problem of unspent balance is more prominent in certain states as compared to others. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report says that states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh Rs. 2,836.82 crore, in Bihar Rs. 2,764.62 crore, in Madhya Pradesh Rs. 866.68 crore, in Assam Rs. 606.30 crore, in Odisha Rs. 436.71 crore and in Andhra Pradesh Rs. 420.16 crore are lying unspent.<br /> <br /> &bull; The MDWS has claimed about 84 percent of sanitation coverage in the rural areas of India as on 24th May, 2018. However, contrary to the figures that was projected by the Ministry, the Parliamentary Standing Committee while examining the subject says that the sanitation coverage figures seemed to be more on &quot;paper&quot; but the actual progress at the ground level is very lethargic. Even a village with 100 percent household toilets cannot be declared ODF till all the inhabitants start using them, says the report. The main thrust of the government should be on the usage of toilets as mere building of toilets alone is not sufficient for the realization of actual vision of an ODF country.<br /> <br /> &bull; Much more is required to be done so as to bring in &quot;behavioural change&quot; in rural populace so as to attain the real motive behind the SBM (G), says the report. In the wake of this serious concern, the Standing Committee has recommended the MDWS to bring about a radical transformation in the &quot;behavioural&quot; aspects of the rural masses by inculcating in them a sense of hygiene and well-being through mass extensive awareness campaigns and other suitable mechanisms, so that the gap in the figures projected and the ground reality may be abridged for the betterment of the country.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Standing Committee has found that the performance of some of states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha in terms of sanitation is very poor. Appalled by the slackness of sanitation coverage in these states, the Committee enquired from the MDWS about the state of affairs. In response to that, the Ministry has informed that they are aware of it and have given special emphasis to the said states through various innovative measures. In this context, the Secretary of the MDWS candidly admitted before the Standing Committee about the dismal performance of bigger states and assured the Committee that the Government will take all necessary steps and will also provide extra budgetary resources to these states so as to improve the situation. The Parliamentary Standing Committee has observed that the efforts made by the government are not complete if the issue of awareness generation is left behind in this demand driven programme. The Committee has strongly recommended that the MDWS should pay more attention towards pace of sanitation in the low performing states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha on a war footing.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Committee is wary of the poor nature of construction and low quality of raw materials being used in the construction of toilets under SBM (G) as found by members themselves and through different feedbacks. The Committee has pressed upon the MDWS to ensure that the quality of raw materials used for construction of toilets under SBM (G) are of a good standard commensurate with the amount being spent as incentive to the beneficiaries without any compromise.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">A Rapid Survey on Swachhta Status was conducted by the NSSO during May-June 2015 alongside its regular 72nd Round (July 2014-June 2015) survey covering 3,788 villages and 2,907 urban blocks. The number of households surveyed was 73,176 in rural India and 41,538 in urban India.<br /> <br /> The survey aims to give a snapshot of the situation on the availability/ accessibility of toilets, solid waste and liquid waste management at sample village/ ward and household levels aggregated at state and country-levels.<br /> <br /> As per the report entitled [inside]Swachhta Status Report 2016[/inside], which has been prepared by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; Out of the 3788 villages surveyed, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose.<br /> <br /> &bull; From the 2,907 sample urban frame survey (UFS) blocks surveyed at all-India level, 42.0 percent wards were found to have community/ public toilets. At all India-level, 1.6 percent wards were found to be having the community /public toilets but not using them.<br /> <br /> &bull; In 54.9 percent of the villages having community toilets, cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the panchayat or on contract payment. In 17.0 percent villages, it was being done by the residents themselves. However, 22.6 percent villages were such where the community toilets were not being cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, cleaning of community/ public toilets was being done by the persons employed by the local municipal body in 73.1 percent wards having these toilets. 12.2 percent wards were such where the cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the residents&rsquo; welfare association. However, community/ public toilets in 8.6 percent wards were not being cleaned by anybody.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 36.8 percent wards in urban areas reported to have a proper liquid waste disposal system for community/ public toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 36.7 percent villages had pakki nali and 19.0 percent villages had katchi nali as drainage arrangement for waste water coming out of the rural households. 44.4 percent villages had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 56.4 percent wards reported to have sewer network for disposal of liquid waste.<br /> <br /> &bull; 78.1 percent wards reported to have a system of street cleaning.<br /> <br /> &bull; 64.2 percent wards were found to have a dumping place for solid waste. These solid waste dumping places were cleaned every day in case of 48.2 percent wards, on a weekly basis in case of 37.7 percent wards and on a monthly basis in case of 9.3 percent wards.&nbsp; However, 4.9 percent wards were such where the solid waste dumping place was not cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 50.5 percent of the households kept the garbage at a specified place outside their own house, 24.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the nearby agriculture field, 5.5 percent households kept it at the common place outside the house, 4.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the biogas plant or manure pit whereas 15.1 percent households threw it around the house.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 45.3 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, 88.8 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India for the households having sanitary toilet, percentage of persons using household/ community toilet was 95.6 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India for the households having sanitary toilet, the percentage of persons using household/ community/ public toilet was 98.7 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India, 42.5 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilet.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, 87.9 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 52.1 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 7.5 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 55.4 percent households contributed to open defecation. This percentage in urban areas was 8.9 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the [inside]Economic Survey 2015-16[/inside], Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>):<br /> <br /> &bull; The Census of India 2011 informs that around 70 percent of India&rsquo;s population (650 million) lives in rural and slum areas. It increases the possibility of exposure of the population to water-borne and vector-borne diseases<br /> <br /> &bull; Only 46.6 percent of households in India have access to drinking water within their premises. A far lower, 43.5 percent of households have access to tap water. Similarly, less than 50 percent households have latrine facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) is accelerating efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage and eliminate open defecation in India by 2 October 2019. It also aims to promote better hygiene amongst the population and improve cleanliness by initiating Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) projects in villages, towns and cities.<br /> <br /> &bull; The progress in sanitation has witnessed a spurt since the launch of the Swachh Bharat Mission. In its first year, i.e. from 2 October 2014 to 2 October 2015, 88 lakh toilets were constructed, against an expected outcome of 60 lakhs. More than 122 lakh toilets have already been constructed in rural areas so far under the mission. Sanitation coverage, which stood at 40.60 percent as per NSSO data, has risen to around 48.8 percent as on 31 December 2015.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme estimates, 61 percent of rural Indians defecate in the open in 2015, compared with only 32 per cent of rural people in sub-Saharan Africa. Even sanitation laggards perform better than India, with 17 percent rural open defecation in Afghanistan and 15 percent in Kenya.<br /> <br /> &bull; In order to improve availability of drinking water in rural areas, the National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) initiated a new project supported by the World Bank, the &lsquo;Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project&ndash;Low Income States&rsquo; with a total cost of Rs. 6000 crore. The project aims to provide safe, 24 x 7 piped drinking water supply to 7.8 million rural population in four low-income States--Assam, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand--that have the lowest piped water supply and sanitation facilities. As on 31 December 2015, the project has implemented 275 single and multi-village piped drinking water supply schemes through the decentralized delivery mechanism of empowered Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committees.<br /> <br /> **page**<br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the United Nations&#39; report entitled: [inside]Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014[/inside] (released in May 2014), (Please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Indian scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 92 million people in India and 112 million people in China without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 792 million people in India and 478 million people in China without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Globally, India continues to be the country with the highest number of people (597 million people) practicing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Despite having some of the highest numbers of open defecators, India (597 million people), Nigeria (39 million people) and Indonesia (54 million people) do not feature among those countries making the greatest strides in reducing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population practicing open defecation in India declined from 74 percent in 1990 to 63 percent in 2000 and further to 48 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in India rose from 18 percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2000 and further to 36 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in rural India was 25 percent whereas in urban India it was 60 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in India rose from 70 percent in 1990 to 81 percent in 2000 and further to 93 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in rural India was 91 percent whereas in urban India it was 97 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Global scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990, almost 2 billion people globally have gained access to improved sanitation, and 2.3 billion have gained access to drinking-water from improved sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Some 1.6 billion of these people have piped water connections in their homes or compounds.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; More than half of the global population lives in cities, and urban areas are still better supplied with improved water and sanitation than rural ones. But the gap is decreasing. In 1990, more than 76% people living in urban areas had access to improved sanitation, as opposed to only 28% in rural ones. By 2012, 80% urban dwellers and 47% rural ones had access to better sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 1990, 95% people in urban areas could drink improved water, compared with 62% people in rural ones. By 2012, 96% people living in towns and 82% of those in rural areas had access to improved water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2012, 116 countries had met the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target for drinking water, 77 had met the MDG target for sanitation and 56 countries had met both targets. MDG 7.C aims to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 89% of the global population used improved drinking water sources, a rise of 13 percentage points in 22 years or 2.3 billion people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 64% of the global population used improved sanitation facilities, a rise of 15 percentage points since 1990. Some 2.5 billion people &ndash; two-thirds of whom live in Asia, and a quarter in sub-Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sanitation facilities. There are 46 countries where at least half the population is not using an improved sanitation facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Although declining across all regions, open defecation is practised by 1 billion people, 82% of whom live in 10 countries. Nine out of 10 people defecating in the open live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Wealthy people universally have higher access to sanitation than the poor. In some countries this gap is narrowing. The gap is increasing, however, in rural areas of countries with low coverage and for marginalized and excluded groups.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 748 million people &ndash; 90% living in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia (43% in Sub-Saharan Africa, and 47% in Asia) &ndash; still use unimproved drinking water sources; 82% live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to access the salient findings of 69th Round of NSS regarding [inside]Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India (July 2012 to December 2012)[/inside].&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/NSS%2069th%20Round%20drinking%20water%20sanitation%20hygiene%20survey.pdf" title="NSS 69th round drinking water sanitation hygiene survey">click here</a> to download the full report Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th Round, July 2012-December 2012, MoSPI.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the [inside]WHO/UNICEF joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation[/inside],&nbsp;<a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf</a>, are as follows:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India with 626 million people who practice open defecation, has more than twice the number of the next 18 countries combined;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 90 per cent of the 692 million people in South Asia who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 593 million in China and 251 million in India gained access to improved sanitation since 1990.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; China and India account for just under half the global progress on sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Water</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2010, 89 per cent of the world&rsquo;s population, or 6.1 billion people, used improved drinking water sources, exceeding the MDG target (88 per cent); 92 per cent are expected to have access in 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2010, two billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Eleven per cent of the global population, or 783 million people, are still without access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2015 the WHO/UNICEF JMP projects that 605 million will still not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Sanitation</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 63 per cent of the global population use toilets and other improved sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2015, 67 per cent will have access to improved sanitation facilities (the MDG target is 75 per cent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 2.5 billion people lack improved sanitation, projected be 2.4 billion by 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 1.1 billion people (15 per cent of the global population) practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 949 million open defecators live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Countries that account for almost three-quarters of the people who practice open defecation:</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">India (626 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Indonesia (63 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Pakistan (40 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Ethiopia (38 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nigeria (34 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Sudan (19 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nepal (15 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">China (14 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Niger (12 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Burkina Faso (9.7 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Mozambique (9.5 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Cambodia (8.6 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the policy report titled [inside]Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011)[/inside], Water Aid,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf">http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has made a political commitment of reaching universal access to clean water by 2012. It has made the political commitment of reaching universal access to urban sanitation by 2012 and rural sanitation by 2017.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The population in India without access to water is 147.3 million. The population in India without access to sanitation is 818.4 million (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, 2010).&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008; however, the progress has been highly inequitable, with the poorest households barely benefiting. Only five million from the poorest section benefited compared with 43 million and 93 million from the richest sections.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Whereas every rural household in Sikkim and Kerala has access to sanitation, and states such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana and West Bengal have seen big improvements to access since 2001, in Bihar 73% of rural households lack adequate sanitation, and across India almost a third of the rural population does not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The five countries with the largest absolute numbers of people without sanitation&ndash;India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan&ndash;are all middle income and account for over 1.7 billion people without sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; WaterAid research in India illustrates how scheduled castes are denied access to water facilities and how scheduled caste children are not allowed to drink water from common sources at school.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India and China were top 10 recipients for clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) aid for nine and eight years respectively, which is consistent with the fact that these two countries are home to the greatest number of people without water and sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In India, the cost of construction of Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs) in the Total Sanitation Campaign is expected to be met by Above Poverty Line households, while for Below Poverty Line households, the cost is shared between the Government of India, the state and individual users, with the exact ratio depending on the unit cost of the facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Diarrhoea, 88 percent of which is caused due to lack of access to clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), is now the biggest killer of children in Africa and the second biggest killer of children worldwide. It is responsible for 2.2 million deaths each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Lack of access to water and sanitation is a major drag on economic growth, and costs African and Asian countries up to 6% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Poor people in South Asia are over 13 times less likely to have access to sanitation than the rich; and poor people in Sub-Saharan Africa are over 15 times more likely to practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There is a rural-urban divide in access to clean water and sanitation. 94% of the urban population in developing countries has access to clean water, compared to 76% &nbsp;in rural areas, and 68% of the urban population has access to improved sanitation, compared with only 40% in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; For families without a drinking-water source at home, it is usually women and girls who go to collect drinking water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost three-quarters of households.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Historically, local natural monopolies have been in public ownership, and about 90% of the world&rsquo;s piped water is delivered by publicly-owned bodies, at both national and municipal levels.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Increasing overall WASH spending to 3.5% of GDP and sanitation to 1% are very large changes from current levels&mdash;but this is the scale of change that is needed if the MDG targets are to be achieved in all regions and LDCs are to get on course for universal access by 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations[/inside] by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010<br /> <a href="http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf">http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Young children are most at risk of death from unsafe water, and women and children are typically responsible for most water collection.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Multiple randomized trials show that water treatment can cost-effectively reduce reported diarrhea. However, many consumers have low willingness to pay for cleaner water, with less than 10% of households purchasing household water treatment under existing retail models.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Provision of information on water quality can increase demand, but only modestly. Free point of collection water treatment systems designed to make water treatment convenient, salient, and public, combined with a local promoter, can generate take up of more than 60 percent. The projected cost is as low as $20 per year of life saved, comparable to vaccines. In contrast, the limited existing evidence suggests many consumers are willing to pay for better access to water, but it does not yet demonstrate that this improves health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Providing dilute chlorine solution free at the point of water collection, together with a local promoter, can increase take up of water treatment from less than 10 percent to more than 60 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Evidence available from randomized studies suggests that consumers realize substantial non-health benefits from convenient access to water and are willing to pay for this.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Separately identifying how water quantity and quality affect health is important because different water interventions affect water quality and quantity asymmetrically. For example, adding chlorine to water affects quality but not quantity. On the other hand, providing household connections to municipal water supplies to households that currently use standpipes is likely to have a bigger effect on the convenience of obtaining water, and thus on the quantity of water consumed, than on water quality.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Increased availability and convenience of water facilitates more frequent washing of hands, dishes, bodies and clothes, thus reducing disease transmission. There is indeed strong evidence that hand washing is important for health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent collection of self-reported diarrhea data through repeated interviews leads to health protective behavior change in addition to respondent fatigue and social desirability bias.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent data collection leads to lower reports of child diarrhea by mothers relative to infrequent surveying and also to higher rates of chlorination verified by tests for chlorine in water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page** </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09 (released in 2010)[/inside], National Sample Survey, <a href="http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf">http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The field work of the nationwide survey was carried out during July 2008 to June 2009. The report is based on the Central sample of 1,53,518 households (97,144 in rural areas and 56,374 in urban areas) surveyed from 8,130 sample villages in rural areas and 4,735 urban blocks spread over all States and Union Territories.<br /> <br /> <em>Availability of Drinking Water Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas the major source of drinking water (most often used) was &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; in respect of 55 per cent of households followed by &lsquo;tap&rsquo; for 30 per cent of households.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, &lsquo;tap&rsquo; was the major source of drinking water for 74 per cent of the households and &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; served another 18 per cent households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The three sources of drinking water, &lsquo;tap&rsquo;, &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; and &lsquo;well&rsquo; together served nearly 97 per cent of rural households and 95 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 86 per cent of the rural households and 91 per cent of urban households got sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the first major source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Shortage of drinking water set in the month of March and gradually reached a peak during May; thereafter, the situation of availability of drinking water gradually improved and by August the situation improved substantially.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the month of May drinking water for 13 per cent of the rural households and 8 per cent of the urban households was insufficient.<br /> <br /> &bull; Drinking water facility within the premises was available to nearly 41 per cent of rural households and 75 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> <em>Bathroom Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Bathroom facility was not available to nearly 64 per cent of rural households, while in urban areas, the proportion of households with no bathroom was lower, nearly 22 per cent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In the rural areas, detached bathrooms were more common (23 per cent of the households) than were attached bathrooms (13 per cent of the households).<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, a higher proportion of households (48 per cent) had attached bathroom than detached bathroom (nearly 31 per cent).<br /> <br /> <em>Sanitation Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility whereas 11 per cent of urban households did not have any latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 14 per cent of the households in rural areas and 8 per cent in urban areas used pit latrine.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull; In rural areas, septic tank/flush latrine was used by 18 per cent households as compared to 77 per cent households in urban areas.</span><br /> <br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>Electricity Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; At the all-India level, nearly 75 per cent of the households had electricity for domestic use. While 66 per cent households in rural areas had this facility, 96 per cent in urban areas had the facility.<br /> <br /> <em>Households With Three Basic Facilities: Drinking Water Within Premises, Latrine and Electricity </em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) whereas in urban areas, all three facilities were available to 68 per cent households.<br /> <br /> <em>Micro Environmental Elements Surrounding the House</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 19 per cent of the households in rural areas and 6 per cent in urban areas had open katcha drainage. Nearly 57 per cent of the households in rural areas and 15 per cent in urban areas had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Garbage disposal arrangement was available to only 24 per cent of rural households and 79 per cent of the urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of the rural households and 6 per cent of the urban households had no direct opening to road.</span><br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update (WHO and UNICEF)[/inside], <a href="http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf">http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf</a>: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Use of improved sanitation facilities is low in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Among the 2.6 billion people in the world who do not use improved sanitation facilities, by far the greatest number are in Southern Asia, but there are also large numbers in Eastern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;61% of global population uses improved sanitation facilities</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Unless huge efforts are made, the proportion of people without access to basic sanitation will not be halved by 2015. Even if we meet the MDG target, there will still be 1.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation. If the trend remains as currently projected, an additional billion people who should have benefited from MDG progress will miss out, and by 2015, there will be 2.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;672 million people will still lack access to improved drinking-water sources in 2015.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Sub-Saharan Africa faces the greatest challenge in increasing the use of improved drinking-water. 884 million people &ndash; 37% of whom live in Sub&ndash;Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sources for drinking-water</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In China, 89% of the population of 1.3 billion uses drinking-water from improved sources, up from 67% in 1990. In India, 88% of the population of 1.2 billion uses drinking-water from such sources, as compared to 72% in 1990. China and India together account for a 47% share, of the 1.8 billion people that gained access to improved drinking-water sources between 1990 and 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For sanitation, even with the increase between 1990 and 2008 in the proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities in China (from 41% to 55%) and India (from 18% to 31%), the world is not on track to meet the sanitation target. This is despite the fact that 475 million people gained access to improved sanitation in these two countries alone, a 38% share of the 1.3 billion people that gained access globally.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the approximately 1.3 billion people who gained access to improved sanitation during the period 1990-2008, 64% live in urban areas.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Worldwide, 87% of the population gets their drinking-water from improved sources, and the corresponding figure for developing regions is also high at 84%. While 94% of the urban population of developing regions uses improved sources, it is only 76% of rural populations.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The rural population without access to an improved drinking-water source is over five times greater than that in urban areas. Of almost 1.8 billion people gaining access to improved drinking-water in the period 1990-2008, 59% live in urban areas. The urban-rural disparities are particularly striking in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are also visible in Asia and Latin America.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The proportion of the world population that practises open defecation declined by almost one third from 25% in 1990 to 17% in 2008. A decline in open defecation rates was recorded in all regions. In Sub-Saharan Africa, open defecation rates fell by 25 per cent. In absolute numbers, the population practising open defecation increased, however, from 188 million in 1990 to 224 million in 2008. In Southern Asia, home to 64% of the world population that defecate in the open, the practice decreased the most &ndash; from 66% in 1990 to 44% in 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 1990 and 2008, more than 1.2 billion people worldwide gained access to a piped connection on premises.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In developing regions, while 73% of the urban population uses piped water from a household connection, only 31% of rural inhabitants have access to household piped water supplies.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For families without a drinking-water source on the premises, it is usually women who go to the source to collect drinking-water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost two thirds of households, while in almost a quarter of households it is men who usually collect the water. In 12% of households, however, children carry the main responsibility for collecting water, with girls under 15 years of age being twice as likely to carry this responsibility as boys under the age of 15 years.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the study titled [inside]Combating Waterborne Disease at the Household Level (2007)[/inside], prepared by The International Network to Promote Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage and WHO, <a href="http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf">http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Globally, 1.1 billion lack access to an &ldquo;improved&rdquo; drinking water supply; many more drink water that is grossly contaminated.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4 billion cases of diarrhoea occur annually, of which 88% is attributable to unsafe water, and inadequate sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases, the vast majority children under 5. 90% of diarrhoeal deaths are borne by children under five, mostly in developing countries.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Lack of safe water perpetuates a cycle whereby poor populations become further disadvantaged, and poverty becomes entrenched.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; WHO estimates that 94% of diarrhoeal cases are preventable through modifications to the environment, including through interventions to increase the availability of clean water, and to improve sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A 2005 systematic review concluded that diarrhoeal episodes are reduced by 25% through improving water supply, 32% by improving sanitation, 45% through hand washing, and by 39% via household water treatment and safe storage.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A growing body of research suggests household water treatment and safe storage (HWTS):a. dramatically improves microbial water quality; b. significantly reduces diarrhoea; c. is among the most effective of water, sanitation and health interventions; d. is highly cost-effective; and e. can be rapidly deployed and taken up by vulnerable populations.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Existing low-cost technologies for safe drinking water are: a. Chlorination &ndash; adding chlorine in liquid or tablet form to drinking water stored in a protected container; b. Solar disinfection &ndash; exposing water in disposable clear plastic bottles to sunlight for a day, typically on the roof of a house; c. Filtration; d. Combined flocculation /disinfection systems&ndash;adding powders or tablets to coagulate and flocculate sediments in water followed by a timed release of disinfectant; e. boiling; f. Safe storage<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Many low-cost HWTS technologies do not come with clear labels and reliable accreditations attesting to their ability to provide &ldquo;safe&rdquo; water. This has led to uncertainty and confusion among consumers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]11th Five Year Plan[/inside]</span><br /> <a href="http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf</span></a>:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The status of provision of water and sanitation has improved slowly. According to Census 1991, 55.54% of the rural population had access to an improved water source. As on 1 April 2007, the Department of Drinking Water Supply&rsquo;s figures show that out of a total of 1,50,7349 rural habitations in the country, 74.39% (11,21,366 habitations) are fully covered and 14.64% (2,20,165 habitations) are partially covered. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;Present estimates shows that out of the 2.17 lakh water quality affected habitation as on 1.4.05, about 70,000 habitations have since been addressed for providing safe drinking water.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The access to toilets is even poorer. As per the latest Census data (2001), only 36.4% of the total population has latrines within or attached to their houses. However in rural areas, only 21.9% of population has latrines within or attached to their houses. An estimate based on the number of individual household toilets constructed under the TSC programme (a demand-driven programme implemented since 1999) puts the sanitation coverage in the country at about 49% (as on November 2007). </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;An evaluation study on the programme conducted in 2002 shows 80% of toilets constructed were put to use. This use is expected to be much higher as awareness has improved much since 2002.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The GoI&rsquo;s major intervention in water sector started in 1972&ndash;73 through Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) for assisting States/Uts to accelerate the coverage of drinking water supply. In 1986, the entire programme was given a mission approach with the launch of the Technology Mission on Drinking Water and Related Water Management. This Technology Mission was later renamed as Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991&ndash;92. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;In 1999, Department of Drinking Water Supply (DDWS) was formed under the MoRD to give emphasis to rural water supply as well as on sanitation. In the same year, new initiatives in water sector had been initiated through Sector Reform Project, later it was scaled up as Swajaldhara in 2002. With sustained interventions, DDWS remains an important institution to support the States/UTs in serving the rural population with water and sanitation related services all across India.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;There are about 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations in the country with more than half of the habitations affected with excess iron (118088). This is followed by fluoride (31306), salinity (23495), nitrate (13958), arsenic (5029) in that order. There are about 25000 habitations affected with multiple problems. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 States. Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam. The hand pump attached de-fluoridation and iron removal plants have failed due to in appropriate technology unsuited to community perceptions and their involvement. Desalination plants have also met a similar fate due to lapses at various levels starting with planning to post implementation maintenance.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;To &lsquo;provide clean drinking water for all by 2009 and ensure that there are no slip-backs by the end of the Eleventh Plan&rsquo; is one of the monitorable targets of the Eleventh Five Year Plan. The first part of the goal coincides with the terminal year of Bharat Nirman Programme under which it is proposed to provide safe drinking water to all habitations. Under the Bharat Nirman Programme 55,067 not covered habitations, 2.8 lakh slipped back habitations, and 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations are proposed to be covered.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">**page**</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">&nbsp; </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"><em>According to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS AND FIGURES&nbsp; *updated November 2004:</em> </span></span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases (including cholera); 90% are children under 5, mostly in developing countries. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;88% of diarrhoeal disease is attributed to unsafe water supply, inadequate sanitation and hygiene. Improved water supply reduces diarrhoea morbidity by between 6% to 25%, if severe outcomes are included. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improved sanitation reduces diarrhoea morbidity by 32%. Hygiene interventions including hygiene education and promotion of hand washing can lead to a reduction of diarrhoeal cases by up to 45%. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improvements in drinking-water quality through household water treatment, such as chlorination at point of use, can lead to a reduction of diarrhoea episodes by between 35% and 39%.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.3 million people die of malaria each year, 90% of whom are children under 5. There are 396 million episodes of malaria every year, most of the disease burden is in Africa south of the Sahara. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Intensified irrigation, dams and other water related projects contribute importantly to this disease burden. Better management of water resources reduces transmission of malaria and other vector-borne diseases.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world &iacute;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world&rsquo;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The development of water resources continues in an accelerated pace to meet the food, fibre and energy needs of a world population of 8 billion by 2025. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Lack of capacity for health impact assessment transfers hidden costs to the health sector and increases the disease burden on local communities. Environmental management approaches for health need to be incorporated into strategies for integrated water resources management.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => '', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 12, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-sanitation-55', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 55, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 25 $metaTitle = 'Environment | Water and Sanitation' $metaKeywords = '' $metaDesc = 'KEY TRENDS &nbsp; &bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural...' $disp = '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />&bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />&bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>environment/water-and-sanitation-55.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>Environment | Water and Sanitation | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content="KEY TRENDS • According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Water and Sanitation</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd) and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />• Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu & Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />• While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> <br />• Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>) </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a> to download</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more) </div><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $reasonPhrase = 'OK'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]Code Context$value
), $first);
$first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67d312f341fff-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67d312f341fff-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67d312f341fff-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67d312f341fff-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25, 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Report%20No.%209%20of%202021_GWMR_English-061c19df1d9dff7.23091105.pdf">click here</a> to access&nbsp;the [inside]Report no 9 of 2021: Performance Audit of Ground Water Management and Regulation for the period 2013-18 (laid on the floor of the Parliament on 21 December, 2021)[/inside]. Kindly <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/CAG%20Press%20Release%20Groundwater%2021%20Dec%202021.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1UNMLzOUev1axQLA4c-0XyJ5BEYk8mN7NshA-OPmNWf2pmfPd8jvGnc80">click here</a> to access the&nbsp;press release by CAG dated 21 December, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access the key findings of [inside]NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019)[/inside].<br /> <br /> Kindly <a href="mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Report_584_final.pdf">click here</a> to access the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019).<br /> <br /> According to the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019):<br /> <br /> &bull; The major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 48.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 57.5 percent of the households in the urban areas had exclusive access to principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 87.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 90.9 percent of the households in the urban areas had sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the principal source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 58.2 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 80.7 percent of the households in the urban areas had drinking water facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 94.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 97.4 percent of the households in the urban areas used &lsquo;improved source of drinking water&rsquo;.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 51.4 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 72.0 percent of the households in the urban areas used improved source of drinking water located in the household premises which was sufficiently available throughout the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 56.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to bathroom.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to bathroom, about 48.4 percent in the rural areas and about 74.8 percent in the urban areas used bathroom attached to the dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 71.3 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to latrine. It may be noted that there may be respondent bias in the reporting of access to latrine as question on benefits received by the households from government schemes was asked prior to the question on access of households to latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; The major type of latrine used by the households was flush/pour-flush to septic tank in both rural and urban areas. About 50.9 percent of the households in rural areas and 48.9 percent of the households in urban areas used flush/pour-flush to septic tank type of latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 94.7 percent of the males and 95.7 percent of the females in the rural areas used latrine regularly while about 98.0 percent of the males and 98.1 percent of the females in the urban areas used latrine regularly.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 93.8 percent of the males and 94.6 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine while about 97.2 percent of both males and females in the urban areas regularly used improved latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 85.8 percent of the males and 86.4 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine which was for exclusive use of the household while the corresponding figure was about 82.4 percent for males and 84.7 percent for females in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 3.5 percent of the household members in the rural areas and about 1.7 percent of the household members in the urban areas never used latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households used latrine, about 4.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 2.1 percent of the households in the urban areas reported that water was not available in or around the latrine used.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 48.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 86.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had bathroom and latrine both within household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 96.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 63.8 percent of the households in the urban areas had own dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 96.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.5 percent of the households in the urban areas used the house for residential purpose only.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 89.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 56.4 percent of the households in the urban areas had independent house.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 76.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.0 percent of the households in the urban areas had the house of pucca structure.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, average floor area of the dwelling unit was about 46.6 sq. mtr. in the rural areas and about 46.1 sq. mtr. in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 93.9 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 99.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had electricity for domestic use.<br /> <br /> <br /> **page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the [inside]CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit of National Rural Drinking Water Programme (published on 7th August, 2018)[/inside] in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) was launched with the objective of providing adequate safe water for drinking, cooking and other domestic needs to every rural person on a sustainable basis. The 12th Plan aimed at providing all rural habitations, schools and anganwadis with safe drinking water by December, 2017. It also envisaged that at least 50 percent of the rural population will be provided piped water supply at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) within the household premises or at a distance of not more than 100 meters from their households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP also aimed to provide household connection to 35 percent of rural households. The NRDWP is being implemented in the states through its six components and through other focused schemes. During the 12th FYP period (2012-17), a total of Rs. 89,956 crore (Central share of Rs. 43,691 crore and state share of Rs. 46,265 crore) was provided for the Programme of which&nbsp; Rs. 81,168 crore was spent during this period.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were set for achievement by 2017 viz. (i) all rural habitations, Government schools and anganwadis to have access to safe drinking water; (ii) 50 per cent of rural population to be provided potable drinking water (55 lpcd) by piped water supply; and (iii) 35 per cent of rural households to be provided household connections.<br /> <br /> &bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by eight percent at 40 lpcd and 5.5 percent at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP was an important element in Government of India&rsquo;s commitment to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal Number 6 which relates to ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.&nbsp; The Ministry had informed (September 2017) that while its objective was to provide drinking water to every Indian household, it would require approximately Rs. 23,000 crore annually till 2030 (at present cost) to achieve this goal and given the present level of outlays, the SDG cannot be realized solely through NRDWP efforts.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Planning and Delivery Mechanism:</em> The planning and delivery framework established at the Centre and states deviated from the NRDWP guidelines. Twenty one states did not frame Water Security Plans and deficiencies were found in preparation and scrutiny of Annual Action Plans such as lack of stakeholder and community participation, non-inclusion of minimum service level of water in schemes and absence of approval of State Level Scheme Sanctioning Committee for schemes included in the plans. The apex level National Drinking Water and Sanitation Council set up to co-ordinate and ensure convergence remained largely dormant. The agencies vital for planning and execution of the Programme such as State Water and Sanitation Mission, State Technical Agency, Source Finding Committee and Block Resource Centres were either not set up or were not performing their assigned functions. These constraints both in terms of planning and delivery ultimately affected achievement of Programme goals and targets.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Fund Management: </em>The NRDWP is implemented as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme with cost being shared between the Central and State Governments. The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation&rsquo;s expectations that the states would be able to compensate for reduced Central allocation by increasing their own financial commitment to the scheme taking into account the increased devolution based on the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission was belied. Thus, the overall availability of funds for the Programme declined during the period 2013-14 to 2016-17. However, even the reduced allocations of funds remained unutilised. There were&nbsp; delays of over 15 months in release of Central share to nodal/ implementing agencies. There was also diversion of funds towards inadmissible items of expenditure and blocking of funds amounting to Rs. 662.61 crore with State Water and Sanitation Missions and work executing agencies.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Programme Implementation:</em> The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were to be achieved by end of 2017 as brought out above. This was attributable partly to deficiencies in implementation such as incomplete, abandoned and non-operational works, unproductive expenditure on equipment, non-functional sustainability structures and gaps in contract management that had a total financial implication of Rs. 2,212.44 crore.<br /> <br /> &bull; Only five percent of quality affected habitations had been provided with Community Water Purification Plants and there was slow progress in setting up such plants out of funds provided by the NITI Aayog. Sustainability plans were either not prepared/ implemented or not included in the Annual Action Plans. There was inadequate focus on surface water based schemes and a large number of schemes&nbsp; (98 percent) including piped water schemes continued to be based on ground water resources. Operation and Maintenance plans were either not prepared in most of the states or had deficiencies leading to schemes becoming non-functional. As a result, incidence of slip-back habitations has persisted.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Lastly, lack of required number of labs at states/ district/ sub-divisional level resulted shortfall in prescribed quality tests of water sources and supply thereby compromising the objective of providing safe drinking water to the rural population.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Monitoring and Evaluation: </em>Data in the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) of the Programme lacked consistency and accuracy due to insufficient authentication and validation controls. The expert teams for inspection viz. Vigilance and Monitoring Committees to monitor and review implementation of NRDWP were either not established or were not functioning in the planned manner. Social audit of the programme to measure beneficiary level satisfaction was not conducted. Hence, the overall monitoring and oversight framework lacked effectiveness and there was inadequate community involvement in this exercise.<br /> &nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> Rural sanitation did not feature on the investment horizon during the first five plan periods as reflected in its negligible funding share. However, it received prominence from the Sixth Plan (1980-85) onwards amid the launch of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation decade in 1980, says the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf">51st Report of Standing Committee</a> on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin. India&rsquo;s first nationwide programme for rural sanitation, the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP), was launched in 1986, in the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) with the objective of improving the quality of life of rural people and to provide privacy and dignity to women. The programme provided large subsidy for construction of sanitary latrines for BPL households.<br /> <br /> The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), was launched with effect from 1st April, 1999 following a &lsquo;community led&rsquo; and &lsquo;people centered&rsquo; approach. The TSC moved away from the principle of state-wise allocation to a &ldquo;demand-driven&rdquo; approach. The programme laid emphasis on Information, Education and Communication (IEC) for generation of effective demand for sanitation facilities. It also laid emphasis on school sanitation and hygiene education for bringing about attitudinal and behavioral changes for adoption of hygienic practices from an early age.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> In order to encourage the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) to take up sanitation promotion, the incentive award scheme of Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP) was launched in 2005. The award was given to those PRIs which attained 100 percent open defecation free environment. This award publicized the sanitation programme significantly across the country.<br /> &nbsp;<br /> Encouraged by the initial success of NGP, and looking into the need to upscale sanitation interventions, the TSC was revamped as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) in 2012, with the objective to accelerate the sanitation coverage in rural areas so as to comprehensively cover rural population through renewed strategies and saturation approach and also to transform rural India into Nirmal Bharat.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> In order to significantly upscale the programme, and bring the nation&#39;s focus on the issue of sanitation, the Government of India had launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) viz. SMB (G) on 2nd October, 2014 to accelerate efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in the country by 2nd October, 2019. With the launch of SBM (G), the construction of toilets in schools and anganwadis has been mandated to the Ministry of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Women and Child Development respectively for greater focus.<br /> <br /> Under the SBM, the focus is on behavior change. Community based collective behavior change has been mentioned as the preferred approach, although the states are free to choose the approach best suited to them. Focus is also on creation of complete open defecation free (ODF) villages, rather than only on construction of individual toilets.<br /> <br /> The key findings of the [inside]51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018)[/inside], are as&nbsp; follows <em>(please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access)</em>:<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) was started in 2014 in rural areas of the country. The Cabinet approved the total estimated outlay of Rs. 1,34,386.61 crore for SBM (G). The financial burden of SBM (G) between the Centre and states is in the ratio of 60:40, with the exception of special category states where the share is 90:10. From 2014-15 to 2017-18, the central allocation made for SBM (G) has been Rs. 36,836.27 crore, of which Rs. 36,825.48 crore has been released to the states. For the financial year 2018-2019, an allocation of Rs. 30,343 crore has been made, with Rs. 7,509.82 crore already released to the states as of May 2018. The remaining Rs. 22,833.18 crore is planned to be released during the course of the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the time of launch of the SBM (G) on 2nd October, 2014, the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20in%20India%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage in India as on 24th May 2018">sanitation coverage in the country</a> was 38.7 percent. This has increased to 84.13 percent as on 24th May, 2018.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20across%20states%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage across states as on 24th May 2018">Sanitation coverage as on 24th May</a>, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; 386 districts, 3,578 blocks, 1,62,688 gram panchayats and 3,66,774 villages have been declared open defecation free (ODF) as on 24th May, 2018. As on 24th May, 2018, 17 states/ UTs namely Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Mizoram, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Meghalaya, Dadar &amp; Nagar Haveli, Daman &amp; Diu, Maharashtra &amp; Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands have been declared ODF. There are around 3 crore households pending as on 1st April, 2018, which are likely to be benefitted from this scheme in 2018-19.<br /> <br /> &bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20ODF%20villages%20across%20states.jpg" title="Proportion of ODF villages across states">proportion of villages</a>, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent).<br /> <br /> &bull; The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) through an Independent Verification Agency has done the National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey 2017-2018.&nbsp; In that survey, 92,040 households in 6,136 villages across all states were covered. The main findings of survey are: 1. Nearly 77 percent households in rural India have access to toilets <em>[the corresponding figure as per the SBM-G Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) at the midpoint of the survey period was 76 percent]</em>; 2. Roughly 93.4 percent of the households having access to a toilet use regularly; 3. Nearly 95.6 percent ODF verified villages confirmed ODF; 4. About 70 percent of the villages found to have minimal litter and stagnant water; 5. Roughly 70 percent villages found to have minimal stagnant water.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to the MDWS, the number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Household%20toilets%20constructed%20in%20India%20in%20lakhs.jpg" title="Household toilets constructed in India">household toilets constructed</a> was 58 lakhs in 2014-15, 126 lakhs in 2015-16, 218 lakhs in 2016-17 and 294 lakhs in 2017-18.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/State%20and%20UT%20wise%20IHHLs%20constructed%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="State and UT wise IHHLs constructed under SBM_Gramin">individual household latrines (IHHLs) </a>constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 7.2 crore. Most IHHL construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in Uttar Pradesh (around 98 lakhs), followed by Rajasthan (76.4 lakhs) and Madhya Pradesh (56.2 lakhs). As per the Cabinet Note, 9.72 crore IHHLs <em>(8.84 crore eligible for incentive and 0.88 crore non-eligible for APLs)</em> to be constructed under SBM (G), says the report.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20persons%20using%20toilets%20for%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202017-18.jpg" title="Proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets in 2017-18">National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey</a> (2017-18), the proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets was the lowest in Tamil Nadu (71.4 percent), followed by Puducherry (78.4 percent), Odisha (85.4 percent), Uttar Pradesh (87.9 percent) and Jharkhand (92.2 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.2 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20households%20having%20access%20to%20water%20for%20use%20in%20toilets%20out%20of%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202016_1.jpg" title="Proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets in 2016">Swachhata Status Report 2016</a> of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), the proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets was the lowest in Odisha (77.5 percent), followed by Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh (both 84.0 percent), Madhya Pradesh (89.2 percent), West Bengal (89.8 percent) and Bihar (90.0 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.9 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Community%20Sanitary%20Complexes.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Community Sanitary Complexes (CSC)</a> constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 10,002. Most number of CSCs construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in West Bengal (2,063), followed by Arunachal Pradesh (1,266), Jammu &amp; Kashmir (1,238), Himachal Pradesh (1,081) and Andhra Pradesh (616).<br /> <br /> &bull; The share of Central expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G) was Rs. 3,748.8 lakhs in 2014-15, Rs. 4,311.49 lakhs in 2015-16, Rs. 4,982.04 lakhs in 2016-17 and Rs. 7,484.69 lakhs in 2017-18. There is significant variation across the states in terms of Centre&#39;s share of expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G).&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Although the funds released under the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachh%20Bharat%20Kosh.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Swachh Bharat Kosh</a> of SBM (G) for Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands, Assam, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Odisha and Tripura was altogether Rs. 399.86 crore, the funds utilised as per the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) was Rs. 129.41 crore. It may be noted that the Swachh Bharat Kosh was set up in 2015 by the Ministry of Finance for channelizing the voluntary contribution from individuals and corporate sectors in response to the call given by Hon&#39;ble Prime Minister to achieve Swachh Bharat by 2nd October, 2019.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Unspent%20Balances%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="Unspent Balances under SBM_Gramin">Unspent balances</a> under the SBM (G) was Rs. -886.27 crore in 2015-16, Rs. -320.50 in 2016-17, Rs. 4,197.38 crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 9,890.84 crore in 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018)</em>. States like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances under the programme. As per the MDWS, the reasons for high unspent balance in some states under SBM (G) are: a. Inadequate capacity at grass root level; and b. Existence of revolving funds and leveraging other sources of credit. In its reply to a query by the Standing Committee, the MDWS has said that higher unspent balance in states automatically reduces their eligibility for further fund release in the subsequent year. Due to this specific modality and inbuilt provision in the SBM (G) guidelines, states observe better financial discipline. Strict monitoring methods are adopted to obtain the progress of each district on real time basis using the online monitoring system. Regular review meetings/ video conferences etc. are organized by the MDWS to discuss issues relating to implementation of the SBM (G) and utilization of funds&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; The Parliamentary Standing Committee has found out that during the year 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018) </em>there was huge unspent balance to the tune of Rs. 9,890.84 crore under the SBM (G). The Committee has observed that the problem of unspent balance is more prominent in certain states as compared to others. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report says that states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh Rs. 2,836.82 crore, in Bihar Rs. 2,764.62 crore, in Madhya Pradesh Rs. 866.68 crore, in Assam Rs. 606.30 crore, in Odisha Rs. 436.71 crore and in Andhra Pradesh Rs. 420.16 crore are lying unspent.<br /> <br /> &bull; The MDWS has claimed about 84 percent of sanitation coverage in the rural areas of India as on 24th May, 2018. However, contrary to the figures that was projected by the Ministry, the Parliamentary Standing Committee while examining the subject says that the sanitation coverage figures seemed to be more on &quot;paper&quot; but the actual progress at the ground level is very lethargic. Even a village with 100 percent household toilets cannot be declared ODF till all the inhabitants start using them, says the report. The main thrust of the government should be on the usage of toilets as mere building of toilets alone is not sufficient for the realization of actual vision of an ODF country.<br /> <br /> &bull; Much more is required to be done so as to bring in &quot;behavioural change&quot; in rural populace so as to attain the real motive behind the SBM (G), says the report. In the wake of this serious concern, the Standing Committee has recommended the MDWS to bring about a radical transformation in the &quot;behavioural&quot; aspects of the rural masses by inculcating in them a sense of hygiene and well-being through mass extensive awareness campaigns and other suitable mechanisms, so that the gap in the figures projected and the ground reality may be abridged for the betterment of the country.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Standing Committee has found that the performance of some of states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha in terms of sanitation is very poor. Appalled by the slackness of sanitation coverage in these states, the Committee enquired from the MDWS about the state of affairs. In response to that, the Ministry has informed that they are aware of it and have given special emphasis to the said states through various innovative measures. In this context, the Secretary of the MDWS candidly admitted before the Standing Committee about the dismal performance of bigger states and assured the Committee that the Government will take all necessary steps and will also provide extra budgetary resources to these states so as to improve the situation. The Parliamentary Standing Committee has observed that the efforts made by the government are not complete if the issue of awareness generation is left behind in this demand driven programme. The Committee has strongly recommended that the MDWS should pay more attention towards pace of sanitation in the low performing states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha on a war footing.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Committee is wary of the poor nature of construction and low quality of raw materials being used in the construction of toilets under SBM (G) as found by members themselves and through different feedbacks. The Committee has pressed upon the MDWS to ensure that the quality of raw materials used for construction of toilets under SBM (G) are of a good standard commensurate with the amount being spent as incentive to the beneficiaries without any compromise.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">A Rapid Survey on Swachhta Status was conducted by the NSSO during May-June 2015 alongside its regular 72nd Round (July 2014-June 2015) survey covering 3,788 villages and 2,907 urban blocks. The number of households surveyed was 73,176 in rural India and 41,538 in urban India.<br /> <br /> The survey aims to give a snapshot of the situation on the availability/ accessibility of toilets, solid waste and liquid waste management at sample village/ ward and household levels aggregated at state and country-levels.<br /> <br /> As per the report entitled [inside]Swachhta Status Report 2016[/inside], which has been prepared by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; Out of the 3788 villages surveyed, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose.<br /> <br /> &bull; From the 2,907 sample urban frame survey (UFS) blocks surveyed at all-India level, 42.0 percent wards were found to have community/ public toilets. At all India-level, 1.6 percent wards were found to be having the community /public toilets but not using them.<br /> <br /> &bull; In 54.9 percent of the villages having community toilets, cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the panchayat or on contract payment. In 17.0 percent villages, it was being done by the residents themselves. However, 22.6 percent villages were such where the community toilets were not being cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, cleaning of community/ public toilets was being done by the persons employed by the local municipal body in 73.1 percent wards having these toilets. 12.2 percent wards were such where the cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the residents&rsquo; welfare association. However, community/ public toilets in 8.6 percent wards were not being cleaned by anybody.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 36.8 percent wards in urban areas reported to have a proper liquid waste disposal system for community/ public toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 36.7 percent villages had pakki nali and 19.0 percent villages had katchi nali as drainage arrangement for waste water coming out of the rural households. 44.4 percent villages had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 56.4 percent wards reported to have sewer network for disposal of liquid waste.<br /> <br /> &bull; 78.1 percent wards reported to have a system of street cleaning.<br /> <br /> &bull; 64.2 percent wards were found to have a dumping place for solid waste. These solid waste dumping places were cleaned every day in case of 48.2 percent wards, on a weekly basis in case of 37.7 percent wards and on a monthly basis in case of 9.3 percent wards.&nbsp; However, 4.9 percent wards were such where the solid waste dumping place was not cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 50.5 percent of the households kept the garbage at a specified place outside their own house, 24.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the nearby agriculture field, 5.5 percent households kept it at the common place outside the house, 4.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the biogas plant or manure pit whereas 15.1 percent households threw it around the house.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 45.3 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, 88.8 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India for the households having sanitary toilet, percentage of persons using household/ community toilet was 95.6 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India for the households having sanitary toilet, the percentage of persons using household/ community/ public toilet was 98.7 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India, 42.5 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilet.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, 87.9 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 52.1 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 7.5 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 55.4 percent households contributed to open defecation. This percentage in urban areas was 8.9 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the [inside]Economic Survey 2015-16[/inside], Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>):<br /> <br /> &bull; The Census of India 2011 informs that around 70 percent of India&rsquo;s population (650 million) lives in rural and slum areas. It increases the possibility of exposure of the population to water-borne and vector-borne diseases<br /> <br /> &bull; Only 46.6 percent of households in India have access to drinking water within their premises. A far lower, 43.5 percent of households have access to tap water. Similarly, less than 50 percent households have latrine facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) is accelerating efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage and eliminate open defecation in India by 2 October 2019. It also aims to promote better hygiene amongst the population and improve cleanliness by initiating Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) projects in villages, towns and cities.<br /> <br /> &bull; The progress in sanitation has witnessed a spurt since the launch of the Swachh Bharat Mission. In its first year, i.e. from 2 October 2014 to 2 October 2015, 88 lakh toilets were constructed, against an expected outcome of 60 lakhs. More than 122 lakh toilets have already been constructed in rural areas so far under the mission. Sanitation coverage, which stood at 40.60 percent as per NSSO data, has risen to around 48.8 percent as on 31 December 2015.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme estimates, 61 percent of rural Indians defecate in the open in 2015, compared with only 32 per cent of rural people in sub-Saharan Africa. Even sanitation laggards perform better than India, with 17 percent rural open defecation in Afghanistan and 15 percent in Kenya.<br /> <br /> &bull; In order to improve availability of drinking water in rural areas, the National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) initiated a new project supported by the World Bank, the &lsquo;Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project&ndash;Low Income States&rsquo; with a total cost of Rs. 6000 crore. The project aims to provide safe, 24 x 7 piped drinking water supply to 7.8 million rural population in four low-income States--Assam, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand--that have the lowest piped water supply and sanitation facilities. As on 31 December 2015, the project has implemented 275 single and multi-village piped drinking water supply schemes through the decentralized delivery mechanism of empowered Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committees.<br /> <br /> **page**<br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the United Nations&#39; report entitled: [inside]Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014[/inside] (released in May 2014), (Please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Indian scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 92 million people in India and 112 million people in China without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 792 million people in India and 478 million people in China without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Globally, India continues to be the country with the highest number of people (597 million people) practicing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Despite having some of the highest numbers of open defecators, India (597 million people), Nigeria (39 million people) and Indonesia (54 million people) do not feature among those countries making the greatest strides in reducing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population practicing open defecation in India declined from 74 percent in 1990 to 63 percent in 2000 and further to 48 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in India rose from 18 percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2000 and further to 36 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in rural India was 25 percent whereas in urban India it was 60 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in India rose from 70 percent in 1990 to 81 percent in 2000 and further to 93 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in rural India was 91 percent whereas in urban India it was 97 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Global scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990, almost 2 billion people globally have gained access to improved sanitation, and 2.3 billion have gained access to drinking-water from improved sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Some 1.6 billion of these people have piped water connections in their homes or compounds.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; More than half of the global population lives in cities, and urban areas are still better supplied with improved water and sanitation than rural ones. But the gap is decreasing. In 1990, more than 76% people living in urban areas had access to improved sanitation, as opposed to only 28% in rural ones. By 2012, 80% urban dwellers and 47% rural ones had access to better sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 1990, 95% people in urban areas could drink improved water, compared with 62% people in rural ones. By 2012, 96% people living in towns and 82% of those in rural areas had access to improved water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2012, 116 countries had met the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target for drinking water, 77 had met the MDG target for sanitation and 56 countries had met both targets. MDG 7.C aims to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 89% of the global population used improved drinking water sources, a rise of 13 percentage points in 22 years or 2.3 billion people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 64% of the global population used improved sanitation facilities, a rise of 15 percentage points since 1990. Some 2.5 billion people &ndash; two-thirds of whom live in Asia, and a quarter in sub-Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sanitation facilities. There are 46 countries where at least half the population is not using an improved sanitation facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Although declining across all regions, open defecation is practised by 1 billion people, 82% of whom live in 10 countries. Nine out of 10 people defecating in the open live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Wealthy people universally have higher access to sanitation than the poor. In some countries this gap is narrowing. The gap is increasing, however, in rural areas of countries with low coverage and for marginalized and excluded groups.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 748 million people &ndash; 90% living in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia (43% in Sub-Saharan Africa, and 47% in Asia) &ndash; still use unimproved drinking water sources; 82% live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to access the salient findings of 69th Round of NSS regarding [inside]Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India (July 2012 to December 2012)[/inside].&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/NSS%2069th%20Round%20drinking%20water%20sanitation%20hygiene%20survey.pdf" title="NSS 69th round drinking water sanitation hygiene survey">click here</a> to download the full report Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th Round, July 2012-December 2012, MoSPI.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the [inside]WHO/UNICEF joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation[/inside],&nbsp;<a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf</a>, are as follows:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India with 626 million people who practice open defecation, has more than twice the number of the next 18 countries combined;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 90 per cent of the 692 million people in South Asia who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 593 million in China and 251 million in India gained access to improved sanitation since 1990.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; China and India account for just under half the global progress on sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Water</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2010, 89 per cent of the world&rsquo;s population, or 6.1 billion people, used improved drinking water sources, exceeding the MDG target (88 per cent); 92 per cent are expected to have access in 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2010, two billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Eleven per cent of the global population, or 783 million people, are still without access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2015 the WHO/UNICEF JMP projects that 605 million will still not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Sanitation</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 63 per cent of the global population use toilets and other improved sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2015, 67 per cent will have access to improved sanitation facilities (the MDG target is 75 per cent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 2.5 billion people lack improved sanitation, projected be 2.4 billion by 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 1.1 billion people (15 per cent of the global population) practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 949 million open defecators live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Countries that account for almost three-quarters of the people who practice open defecation:</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">India (626 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Indonesia (63 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Pakistan (40 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Ethiopia (38 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nigeria (34 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Sudan (19 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nepal (15 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">China (14 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Niger (12 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Burkina Faso (9.7 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Mozambique (9.5 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Cambodia (8.6 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the policy report titled [inside]Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011)[/inside], Water Aid,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf">http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has made a political commitment of reaching universal access to clean water by 2012. It has made the political commitment of reaching universal access to urban sanitation by 2012 and rural sanitation by 2017.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The population in India without access to water is 147.3 million. The population in India without access to sanitation is 818.4 million (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, 2010).&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008; however, the progress has been highly inequitable, with the poorest households barely benefiting. Only five million from the poorest section benefited compared with 43 million and 93 million from the richest sections.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Whereas every rural household in Sikkim and Kerala has access to sanitation, and states such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana and West Bengal have seen big improvements to access since 2001, in Bihar 73% of rural households lack adequate sanitation, and across India almost a third of the rural population does not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The five countries with the largest absolute numbers of people without sanitation&ndash;India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan&ndash;are all middle income and account for over 1.7 billion people without sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; WaterAid research in India illustrates how scheduled castes are denied access to water facilities and how scheduled caste children are not allowed to drink water from common sources at school.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India and China were top 10 recipients for clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) aid for nine and eight years respectively, which is consistent with the fact that these two countries are home to the greatest number of people without water and sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In India, the cost of construction of Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs) in the Total Sanitation Campaign is expected to be met by Above Poverty Line households, while for Below Poverty Line households, the cost is shared between the Government of India, the state and individual users, with the exact ratio depending on the unit cost of the facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Diarrhoea, 88 percent of which is caused due to lack of access to clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), is now the biggest killer of children in Africa and the second biggest killer of children worldwide. It is responsible for 2.2 million deaths each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Lack of access to water and sanitation is a major drag on economic growth, and costs African and Asian countries up to 6% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Poor people in South Asia are over 13 times less likely to have access to sanitation than the rich; and poor people in Sub-Saharan Africa are over 15 times more likely to practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There is a rural-urban divide in access to clean water and sanitation. 94% of the urban population in developing countries has access to clean water, compared to 76% &nbsp;in rural areas, and 68% of the urban population has access to improved sanitation, compared with only 40% in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; For families without a drinking-water source at home, it is usually women and girls who go to collect drinking water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost three-quarters of households.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Historically, local natural monopolies have been in public ownership, and about 90% of the world&rsquo;s piped water is delivered by publicly-owned bodies, at both national and municipal levels.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Increasing overall WASH spending to 3.5% of GDP and sanitation to 1% are very large changes from current levels&mdash;but this is the scale of change that is needed if the MDG targets are to be achieved in all regions and LDCs are to get on course for universal access by 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations[/inside] by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010<br /> <a href="http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf">http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Young children are most at risk of death from unsafe water, and women and children are typically responsible for most water collection.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Multiple randomized trials show that water treatment can cost-effectively reduce reported diarrhea. However, many consumers have low willingness to pay for cleaner water, with less than 10% of households purchasing household water treatment under existing retail models.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Provision of information on water quality can increase demand, but only modestly. Free point of collection water treatment systems designed to make water treatment convenient, salient, and public, combined with a local promoter, can generate take up of more than 60 percent. The projected cost is as low as $20 per year of life saved, comparable to vaccines. In contrast, the limited existing evidence suggests many consumers are willing to pay for better access to water, but it does not yet demonstrate that this improves health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Providing dilute chlorine solution free at the point of water collection, together with a local promoter, can increase take up of water treatment from less than 10 percent to more than 60 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Evidence available from randomized studies suggests that consumers realize substantial non-health benefits from convenient access to water and are willing to pay for this.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Separately identifying how water quantity and quality affect health is important because different water interventions affect water quality and quantity asymmetrically. For example, adding chlorine to water affects quality but not quantity. On the other hand, providing household connections to municipal water supplies to households that currently use standpipes is likely to have a bigger effect on the convenience of obtaining water, and thus on the quantity of water consumed, than on water quality.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Increased availability and convenience of water facilitates more frequent washing of hands, dishes, bodies and clothes, thus reducing disease transmission. There is indeed strong evidence that hand washing is important for health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent collection of self-reported diarrhea data through repeated interviews leads to health protective behavior change in addition to respondent fatigue and social desirability bias.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent data collection leads to lower reports of child diarrhea by mothers relative to infrequent surveying and also to higher rates of chlorination verified by tests for chlorine in water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page** </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09 (released in 2010)[/inside], National Sample Survey, <a href="http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf">http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The field work of the nationwide survey was carried out during July 2008 to June 2009. The report is based on the Central sample of 1,53,518 households (97,144 in rural areas and 56,374 in urban areas) surveyed from 8,130 sample villages in rural areas and 4,735 urban blocks spread over all States and Union Territories.<br /> <br /> <em>Availability of Drinking Water Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas the major source of drinking water (most often used) was &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; in respect of 55 per cent of households followed by &lsquo;tap&rsquo; for 30 per cent of households.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, &lsquo;tap&rsquo; was the major source of drinking water for 74 per cent of the households and &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; served another 18 per cent households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The three sources of drinking water, &lsquo;tap&rsquo;, &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; and &lsquo;well&rsquo; together served nearly 97 per cent of rural households and 95 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 86 per cent of the rural households and 91 per cent of urban households got sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the first major source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Shortage of drinking water set in the month of March and gradually reached a peak during May; thereafter, the situation of availability of drinking water gradually improved and by August the situation improved substantially.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the month of May drinking water for 13 per cent of the rural households and 8 per cent of the urban households was insufficient.<br /> <br /> &bull; Drinking water facility within the premises was available to nearly 41 per cent of rural households and 75 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> <em>Bathroom Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Bathroom facility was not available to nearly 64 per cent of rural households, while in urban areas, the proportion of households with no bathroom was lower, nearly 22 per cent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In the rural areas, detached bathrooms were more common (23 per cent of the households) than were attached bathrooms (13 per cent of the households).<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, a higher proportion of households (48 per cent) had attached bathroom than detached bathroom (nearly 31 per cent).<br /> <br /> <em>Sanitation Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility whereas 11 per cent of urban households did not have any latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 14 per cent of the households in rural areas and 8 per cent in urban areas used pit latrine.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull; In rural areas, septic tank/flush latrine was used by 18 per cent households as compared to 77 per cent households in urban areas.</span><br /> <br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>Electricity Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; At the all-India level, nearly 75 per cent of the households had electricity for domestic use. While 66 per cent households in rural areas had this facility, 96 per cent in urban areas had the facility.<br /> <br /> <em>Households With Three Basic Facilities: Drinking Water Within Premises, Latrine and Electricity </em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) whereas in urban areas, all three facilities were available to 68 per cent households.<br /> <br /> <em>Micro Environmental Elements Surrounding the House</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 19 per cent of the households in rural areas and 6 per cent in urban areas had open katcha drainage. Nearly 57 per cent of the households in rural areas and 15 per cent in urban areas had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Garbage disposal arrangement was available to only 24 per cent of rural households and 79 per cent of the urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of the rural households and 6 per cent of the urban households had no direct opening to road.</span><br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update (WHO and UNICEF)[/inside], <a href="http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf">http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf</a>: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Use of improved sanitation facilities is low in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Among the 2.6 billion people in the world who do not use improved sanitation facilities, by far the greatest number are in Southern Asia, but there are also large numbers in Eastern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;61% of global population uses improved sanitation facilities</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Unless huge efforts are made, the proportion of people without access to basic sanitation will not be halved by 2015. Even if we meet the MDG target, there will still be 1.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation. If the trend remains as currently projected, an additional billion people who should have benefited from MDG progress will miss out, and by 2015, there will be 2.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;672 million people will still lack access to improved drinking-water sources in 2015.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Sub-Saharan Africa faces the greatest challenge in increasing the use of improved drinking-water. 884 million people &ndash; 37% of whom live in Sub&ndash;Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sources for drinking-water</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In China, 89% of the population of 1.3 billion uses drinking-water from improved sources, up from 67% in 1990. In India, 88% of the population of 1.2 billion uses drinking-water from such sources, as compared to 72% in 1990. China and India together account for a 47% share, of the 1.8 billion people that gained access to improved drinking-water sources between 1990 and 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For sanitation, even with the increase between 1990 and 2008 in the proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities in China (from 41% to 55%) and India (from 18% to 31%), the world is not on track to meet the sanitation target. This is despite the fact that 475 million people gained access to improved sanitation in these two countries alone, a 38% share of the 1.3 billion people that gained access globally.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the approximately 1.3 billion people who gained access to improved sanitation during the period 1990-2008, 64% live in urban areas.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Worldwide, 87% of the population gets their drinking-water from improved sources, and the corresponding figure for developing regions is also high at 84%. While 94% of the urban population of developing regions uses improved sources, it is only 76% of rural populations.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The rural population without access to an improved drinking-water source is over five times greater than that in urban areas. Of almost 1.8 billion people gaining access to improved drinking-water in the period 1990-2008, 59% live in urban areas. The urban-rural disparities are particularly striking in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are also visible in Asia and Latin America.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The proportion of the world population that practises open defecation declined by almost one third from 25% in 1990 to 17% in 2008. A decline in open defecation rates was recorded in all regions. In Sub-Saharan Africa, open defecation rates fell by 25 per cent. In absolute numbers, the population practising open defecation increased, however, from 188 million in 1990 to 224 million in 2008. In Southern Asia, home to 64% of the world population that defecate in the open, the practice decreased the most &ndash; from 66% in 1990 to 44% in 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 1990 and 2008, more than 1.2 billion people worldwide gained access to a piped connection on premises.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In developing regions, while 73% of the urban population uses piped water from a household connection, only 31% of rural inhabitants have access to household piped water supplies.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For families without a drinking-water source on the premises, it is usually women who go to the source to collect drinking-water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost two thirds of households, while in almost a quarter of households it is men who usually collect the water. In 12% of households, however, children carry the main responsibility for collecting water, with girls under 15 years of age being twice as likely to carry this responsibility as boys under the age of 15 years.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the study titled [inside]Combating Waterborne Disease at the Household Level (2007)[/inside], prepared by The International Network to Promote Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage and WHO, <a href="http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf">http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Globally, 1.1 billion lack access to an &ldquo;improved&rdquo; drinking water supply; many more drink water that is grossly contaminated.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4 billion cases of diarrhoea occur annually, of which 88% is attributable to unsafe water, and inadequate sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases, the vast majority children under 5. 90% of diarrhoeal deaths are borne by children under five, mostly in developing countries.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Lack of safe water perpetuates a cycle whereby poor populations become further disadvantaged, and poverty becomes entrenched.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; WHO estimates that 94% of diarrhoeal cases are preventable through modifications to the environment, including through interventions to increase the availability of clean water, and to improve sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A 2005 systematic review concluded that diarrhoeal episodes are reduced by 25% through improving water supply, 32% by improving sanitation, 45% through hand washing, and by 39% via household water treatment and safe storage.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A growing body of research suggests household water treatment and safe storage (HWTS):a. dramatically improves microbial water quality; b. significantly reduces diarrhoea; c. is among the most effective of water, sanitation and health interventions; d. is highly cost-effective; and e. can be rapidly deployed and taken up by vulnerable populations.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Existing low-cost technologies for safe drinking water are: a. Chlorination &ndash; adding chlorine in liquid or tablet form to drinking water stored in a protected container; b. Solar disinfection &ndash; exposing water in disposable clear plastic bottles to sunlight for a day, typically on the roof of a house; c. Filtration; d. Combined flocculation /disinfection systems&ndash;adding powders or tablets to coagulate and flocculate sediments in water followed by a timed release of disinfectant; e. boiling; f. Safe storage<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Many low-cost HWTS technologies do not come with clear labels and reliable accreditations attesting to their ability to provide &ldquo;safe&rdquo; water. This has led to uncertainty and confusion among consumers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]11th Five Year Plan[/inside]</span><br /> <a href="http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf</span></a>:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The status of provision of water and sanitation has improved slowly. According to Census 1991, 55.54% of the rural population had access to an improved water source. As on 1 April 2007, the Department of Drinking Water Supply&rsquo;s figures show that out of a total of 1,50,7349 rural habitations in the country, 74.39% (11,21,366 habitations) are fully covered and 14.64% (2,20,165 habitations) are partially covered. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;Present estimates shows that out of the 2.17 lakh water quality affected habitation as on 1.4.05, about 70,000 habitations have since been addressed for providing safe drinking water.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The access to toilets is even poorer. As per the latest Census data (2001), only 36.4% of the total population has latrines within or attached to their houses. However in rural areas, only 21.9% of population has latrines within or attached to their houses. An estimate based on the number of individual household toilets constructed under the TSC programme (a demand-driven programme implemented since 1999) puts the sanitation coverage in the country at about 49% (as on November 2007). </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;An evaluation study on the programme conducted in 2002 shows 80% of toilets constructed were put to use. This use is expected to be much higher as awareness has improved much since 2002.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The GoI&rsquo;s major intervention in water sector started in 1972&ndash;73 through Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) for assisting States/Uts to accelerate the coverage of drinking water supply. In 1986, the entire programme was given a mission approach with the launch of the Technology Mission on Drinking Water and Related Water Management. This Technology Mission was later renamed as Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991&ndash;92. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;In 1999, Department of Drinking Water Supply (DDWS) was formed under the MoRD to give emphasis to rural water supply as well as on sanitation. In the same year, new initiatives in water sector had been initiated through Sector Reform Project, later it was scaled up as Swajaldhara in 2002. With sustained interventions, DDWS remains an important institution to support the States/UTs in serving the rural population with water and sanitation related services all across India.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;There are about 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations in the country with more than half of the habitations affected with excess iron (118088). This is followed by fluoride (31306), salinity (23495), nitrate (13958), arsenic (5029) in that order. There are about 25000 habitations affected with multiple problems. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 States. Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam. The hand pump attached de-fluoridation and iron removal plants have failed due to in appropriate technology unsuited to community perceptions and their involvement. Desalination plants have also met a similar fate due to lapses at various levels starting with planning to post implementation maintenance.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;To &lsquo;provide clean drinking water for all by 2009 and ensure that there are no slip-backs by the end of the Eleventh Plan&rsquo; is one of the monitorable targets of the Eleventh Five Year Plan. The first part of the goal coincides with the terminal year of Bharat Nirman Programme under which it is proposed to provide safe drinking water to all habitations. Under the Bharat Nirman Programme 55,067 not covered habitations, 2.8 lakh slipped back habitations, and 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations are proposed to be covered.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">**page**</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">&nbsp; </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"><em>According to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS AND FIGURES&nbsp; *updated November 2004:</em> </span></span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases (including cholera); 90% are children under 5, mostly in developing countries. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;88% of diarrhoeal disease is attributed to unsafe water supply, inadequate sanitation and hygiene. Improved water supply reduces diarrhoea morbidity by between 6% to 25%, if severe outcomes are included. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improved sanitation reduces diarrhoea morbidity by 32%. Hygiene interventions including hygiene education and promotion of hand washing can lead to a reduction of diarrhoeal cases by up to 45%. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improvements in drinking-water quality through household water treatment, such as chlorination at point of use, can lead to a reduction of diarrhoea episodes by between 35% and 39%.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.3 million people die of malaria each year, 90% of whom are children under 5. There are 396 million episodes of malaria every year, most of the disease burden is in Africa south of the Sahara. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Intensified irrigation, dams and other water related projects contribute importantly to this disease burden. Better management of water resources reduces transmission of malaria and other vector-borne diseases.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world &iacute;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world&rsquo;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The development of water resources continues in an accelerated pace to meet the food, fibre and energy needs of a world population of 8 billion by 2025. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Lack of capacity for health impact assessment transfers hidden costs to the health sector and increases the disease burden on local communities. Environmental management approaches for health need to be incorporated into strategies for integrated water resources management.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => '', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 12, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-sanitation-55', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 55, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [[maximum depth reached]], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 25, 'metaTitle' => 'Environment | Water and Sanitation', 'metaKeywords' => '', 'metaDesc' => 'KEY TRENDS &nbsp; &bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural...', 'disp' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />&bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />&bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25, 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p> <div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Report%20No.%209%20of%202021_GWMR_English-061c19df1d9dff7.23091105.pdf">click here</a> to access&nbsp;the [inside]Report no 9 of 2021: Performance Audit of Ground Water Management and Regulation for the period 2013-18 (laid on the floor of the Parliament on 21 December, 2021)[/inside]. Kindly <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/CAG%20Press%20Release%20Groundwater%2021%20Dec%202021.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1UNMLzOUev1axQLA4c-0XyJ5BEYk8mN7NshA-OPmNWf2pmfPd8jvGnc80">click here</a> to access the&nbsp;press release by CAG dated 21 December, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access the key findings of [inside]NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019)[/inside].<br /> <br /> Kindly <a href="mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Report_584_final.pdf">click here</a> to access the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019).<br /> <br /> According to the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019):<br /> <br /> &bull; The major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 48.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 57.5 percent of the households in the urban areas had exclusive access to principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 87.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 90.9 percent of the households in the urban areas had sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the principal source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 58.2 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 80.7 percent of the households in the urban areas had drinking water facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 94.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 97.4 percent of the households in the urban areas used &lsquo;improved source of drinking water&rsquo;.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 51.4 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 72.0 percent of the households in the urban areas used improved source of drinking water located in the household premises which was sufficiently available throughout the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 56.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to bathroom.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to bathroom, about 48.4 percent in the rural areas and about 74.8 percent in the urban areas used bathroom attached to the dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 71.3 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to latrine. It may be noted that there may be respondent bias in the reporting of access to latrine as question on benefits received by the households from government schemes was asked prior to the question on access of households to latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; The major type of latrine used by the households was flush/pour-flush to septic tank in both rural and urban areas. About 50.9 percent of the households in rural areas and 48.9 percent of the households in urban areas used flush/pour-flush to septic tank type of latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 94.7 percent of the males and 95.7 percent of the females in the rural areas used latrine regularly while about 98.0 percent of the males and 98.1 percent of the females in the urban areas used latrine regularly.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 93.8 percent of the males and 94.6 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine while about 97.2 percent of both males and females in the urban areas regularly used improved latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 85.8 percent of the males and 86.4 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine which was for exclusive use of the household while the corresponding figure was about 82.4 percent for males and 84.7 percent for females in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households which had access to latrine, about 3.5 percent of the household members in the rural areas and about 1.7 percent of the household members in the urban areas never used latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households used latrine, about 4.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 2.1 percent of the households in the urban areas reported that water was not available in or around the latrine used.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 48.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 86.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had bathroom and latrine both within household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; Roughly 96.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 63.8 percent of the households in the urban areas had own dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 96.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.5 percent of the households in the urban areas used the house for residential purpose only.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 89.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 56.4 percent of the households in the urban areas had independent house.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 76.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.0 percent of the households in the urban areas had the house of pucca structure.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, average floor area of the dwelling unit was about 46.6 sq. mtr. in the rural areas and about 46.1 sq. mtr. in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> &bull; Among the households living in houses, about 93.9 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 99.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had electricity for domestic use.<br /> <br /> <br /> **page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the [inside]CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit of National Rural Drinking Water Programme (published on 7th August, 2018)[/inside] in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) was launched with the objective of providing adequate safe water for drinking, cooking and other domestic needs to every rural person on a sustainable basis. The 12th Plan aimed at providing all rural habitations, schools and anganwadis with safe drinking water by December, 2017. It also envisaged that at least 50 percent of the rural population will be provided piped water supply at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) within the household premises or at a distance of not more than 100 meters from their households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP also aimed to provide household connection to 35 percent of rural households. The NRDWP is being implemented in the states through its six components and through other focused schemes. During the 12th FYP period (2012-17), a total of Rs. 89,956 crore (Central share of Rs. 43,691 crore and state share of Rs. 46,265 crore) was provided for the Programme of which&nbsp; Rs. 81,168 crore was spent during this period.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were set for achievement by 2017 viz. (i) all rural habitations, Government schools and anganwadis to have access to safe drinking water; (ii) 50 per cent of rural population to be provided potable drinking water (55 lpcd) by piped water supply; and (iii) 35 per cent of rural households to be provided household connections.<br /> <br /> &bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by eight percent at 40 lpcd and 5.5 percent at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17.<br /> <br /> &bull; The NRDWP was an important element in Government of India&rsquo;s commitment to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal Number 6 which relates to ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.&nbsp; The Ministry had informed (September 2017) that while its objective was to provide drinking water to every Indian household, it would require approximately Rs. 23,000 crore annually till 2030 (at present cost) to achieve this goal and given the present level of outlays, the SDG cannot be realized solely through NRDWP efforts.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Planning and Delivery Mechanism:</em> The planning and delivery framework established at the Centre and states deviated from the NRDWP guidelines. Twenty one states did not frame Water Security Plans and deficiencies were found in preparation and scrutiny of Annual Action Plans such as lack of stakeholder and community participation, non-inclusion of minimum service level of water in schemes and absence of approval of State Level Scheme Sanctioning Committee for schemes included in the plans. The apex level National Drinking Water and Sanitation Council set up to co-ordinate and ensure convergence remained largely dormant. The agencies vital for planning and execution of the Programme such as State Water and Sanitation Mission, State Technical Agency, Source Finding Committee and Block Resource Centres were either not set up or were not performing their assigned functions. These constraints both in terms of planning and delivery ultimately affected achievement of Programme goals and targets.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Fund Management: </em>The NRDWP is implemented as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme with cost being shared between the Central and State Governments. The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation&rsquo;s expectations that the states would be able to compensate for reduced Central allocation by increasing their own financial commitment to the scheme taking into account the increased devolution based on the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission was belied. Thus, the overall availability of funds for the Programme declined during the period 2013-14 to 2016-17. However, even the reduced allocations of funds remained unutilised. There were&nbsp; delays of over 15 months in release of Central share to nodal/ implementing agencies. There was also diversion of funds towards inadmissible items of expenditure and blocking of funds amounting to Rs. 662.61 crore with State Water and Sanitation Missions and work executing agencies.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Programme Implementation:</em> The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were to be achieved by end of 2017 as brought out above. This was attributable partly to deficiencies in implementation such as incomplete, abandoned and non-operational works, unproductive expenditure on equipment, non-functional sustainability structures and gaps in contract management that had a total financial implication of Rs. 2,212.44 crore.<br /> <br /> &bull; Only five percent of quality affected habitations had been provided with Community Water Purification Plants and there was slow progress in setting up such plants out of funds provided by the NITI Aayog. Sustainability plans were either not prepared/ implemented or not included in the Annual Action Plans. There was inadequate focus on surface water based schemes and a large number of schemes&nbsp; (98 percent) including piped water schemes continued to be based on ground water resources. Operation and Maintenance plans were either not prepared in most of the states or had deficiencies leading to schemes becoming non-functional. As a result, incidence of slip-back habitations has persisted.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Lastly, lack of required number of labs at states/ district/ sub-divisional level resulted shortfall in prescribed quality tests of water sources and supply thereby compromising the objective of providing safe drinking water to the rural population.<br /> <br /> &bull; <em>Monitoring and Evaluation: </em>Data in the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) of the Programme lacked consistency and accuracy due to insufficient authentication and validation controls. The expert teams for inspection viz. Vigilance and Monitoring Committees to monitor and review implementation of NRDWP were either not established or were not functioning in the planned manner. Social audit of the programme to measure beneficiary level satisfaction was not conducted. Hence, the overall monitoring and oversight framework lacked effectiveness and there was inadequate community involvement in this exercise.<br /> &nbsp;&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> Rural sanitation did not feature on the investment horizon during the first five plan periods as reflected in its negligible funding share. However, it received prominence from the Sixth Plan (1980-85) onwards amid the launch of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation decade in 1980, says the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf">51st Report of Standing Committee</a> on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin. India&rsquo;s first nationwide programme for rural sanitation, the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP), was launched in 1986, in the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) with the objective of improving the quality of life of rural people and to provide privacy and dignity to women. The programme provided large subsidy for construction of sanitary latrines for BPL households.<br /> <br /> The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), was launched with effect from 1st April, 1999 following a &lsquo;community led&rsquo; and &lsquo;people centered&rsquo; approach. The TSC moved away from the principle of state-wise allocation to a &ldquo;demand-driven&rdquo; approach. The programme laid emphasis on Information, Education and Communication (IEC) for generation of effective demand for sanitation facilities. It also laid emphasis on school sanitation and hygiene education for bringing about attitudinal and behavioral changes for adoption of hygienic practices from an early age.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> In order to encourage the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) to take up sanitation promotion, the incentive award scheme of Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP) was launched in 2005. The award was given to those PRIs which attained 100 percent open defecation free environment. This award publicized the sanitation programme significantly across the country.<br /> &nbsp;<br /> Encouraged by the initial success of NGP, and looking into the need to upscale sanitation interventions, the TSC was revamped as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) in 2012, with the objective to accelerate the sanitation coverage in rural areas so as to comprehensively cover rural population through renewed strategies and saturation approach and also to transform rural India into Nirmal Bharat.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> In order to significantly upscale the programme, and bring the nation&#39;s focus on the issue of sanitation, the Government of India had launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) viz. SMB (G) on 2nd October, 2014 to accelerate efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in the country by 2nd October, 2019. With the launch of SBM (G), the construction of toilets in schools and anganwadis has been mandated to the Ministry of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Women and Child Development respectively for greater focus.<br /> <br /> Under the SBM, the focus is on behavior change. Community based collective behavior change has been mentioned as the preferred approach, although the states are free to choose the approach best suited to them. Focus is also on creation of complete open defecation free (ODF) villages, rather than only on construction of individual toilets.<br /> <br /> The key findings of the [inside]51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018)[/inside], are as&nbsp; follows <em>(please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access)</em>:<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) was started in 2014 in rural areas of the country. The Cabinet approved the total estimated outlay of Rs. 1,34,386.61 crore for SBM (G). The financial burden of SBM (G) between the Centre and states is in the ratio of 60:40, with the exception of special category states where the share is 90:10. From 2014-15 to 2017-18, the central allocation made for SBM (G) has been Rs. 36,836.27 crore, of which Rs. 36,825.48 crore has been released to the states. For the financial year 2018-2019, an allocation of Rs. 30,343 crore has been made, with Rs. 7,509.82 crore already released to the states as of May 2018. The remaining Rs. 22,833.18 crore is planned to be released during the course of the year.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the time of launch of the SBM (G) on 2nd October, 2014, the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20in%20India%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage in India as on 24th May 2018">sanitation coverage in the country</a> was 38.7 percent. This has increased to 84.13 percent as on 24th May, 2018.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20across%20states%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage across states as on 24th May 2018">Sanitation coverage as on 24th May</a>, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent.&nbsp;<br /> &nbsp;<br /> &bull; 386 districts, 3,578 blocks, 1,62,688 gram panchayats and 3,66,774 villages have been declared open defecation free (ODF) as on 24th May, 2018. As on 24th May, 2018, 17 states/ UTs namely Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Mizoram, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Meghalaya, Dadar &amp; Nagar Haveli, Daman &amp; Diu, Maharashtra &amp; Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands have been declared ODF. There are around 3 crore households pending as on 1st April, 2018, which are likely to be benefitted from this scheme in 2018-19.<br /> <br /> &bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20ODF%20villages%20across%20states.jpg" title="Proportion of ODF villages across states">proportion of villages</a>, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent).<br /> <br /> &bull; The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) through an Independent Verification Agency has done the National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey 2017-2018.&nbsp; In that survey, 92,040 households in 6,136 villages across all states were covered. The main findings of survey are: 1. Nearly 77 percent households in rural India have access to toilets <em>[the corresponding figure as per the SBM-G Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) at the midpoint of the survey period was 76 percent]</em>; 2. Roughly 93.4 percent of the households having access to a toilet use regularly; 3. Nearly 95.6 percent ODF verified villages confirmed ODF; 4. About 70 percent of the villages found to have minimal litter and stagnant water; 5. Roughly 70 percent villages found to have minimal stagnant water.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to the MDWS, the number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Household%20toilets%20constructed%20in%20India%20in%20lakhs.jpg" title="Household toilets constructed in India">household toilets constructed</a> was 58 lakhs in 2014-15, 126 lakhs in 2015-16, 218 lakhs in 2016-17 and 294 lakhs in 2017-18.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/State%20and%20UT%20wise%20IHHLs%20constructed%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="State and UT wise IHHLs constructed under SBM_Gramin">individual household latrines (IHHLs) </a>constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 7.2 crore. Most IHHL construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in Uttar Pradesh (around 98 lakhs), followed by Rajasthan (76.4 lakhs) and Madhya Pradesh (56.2 lakhs). As per the Cabinet Note, 9.72 crore IHHLs <em>(8.84 crore eligible for incentive and 0.88 crore non-eligible for APLs)</em> to be constructed under SBM (G), says the report.&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20persons%20using%20toilets%20for%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202017-18.jpg" title="Proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets in 2017-18">National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey</a> (2017-18), the proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets was the lowest in Tamil Nadu (71.4 percent), followed by Puducherry (78.4 percent), Odisha (85.4 percent), Uttar Pradesh (87.9 percent) and Jharkhand (92.2 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.2 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20households%20having%20access%20to%20water%20for%20use%20in%20toilets%20out%20of%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202016_1.jpg" title="Proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets in 2016">Swachhata Status Report 2016</a> of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), the proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets was the lowest in Odisha (77.5 percent), followed by Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh (both 84.0 percent), Madhya Pradesh (89.2 percent), West Bengal (89.8 percent) and Bihar (90.0 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.9 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Community%20Sanitary%20Complexes.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Community Sanitary Complexes (CSC)</a> constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 10,002. Most number of CSCs construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in West Bengal (2,063), followed by Arunachal Pradesh (1,266), Jammu &amp; Kashmir (1,238), Himachal Pradesh (1,081) and Andhra Pradesh (616).<br /> <br /> &bull; The share of Central expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G) was Rs. 3,748.8 lakhs in 2014-15, Rs. 4,311.49 lakhs in 2015-16, Rs. 4,982.04 lakhs in 2016-17 and Rs. 7,484.69 lakhs in 2017-18. There is significant variation across the states in terms of Centre&#39;s share of expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G).&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; Although the funds released under the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachh%20Bharat%20Kosh.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Swachh Bharat Kosh</a> of SBM (G) for Andaman &amp; Nicobar Islands, Assam, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Odisha and Tripura was altogether Rs. 399.86 crore, the funds utilised as per the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) was Rs. 129.41 crore. It may be noted that the Swachh Bharat Kosh was set up in 2015 by the Ministry of Finance for channelizing the voluntary contribution from individuals and corporate sectors in response to the call given by Hon&#39;ble Prime Minister to achieve Swachh Bharat by 2nd October, 2019.<br /> <br /> &bull; <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Unspent%20Balances%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="Unspent Balances under SBM_Gramin">Unspent balances</a> under the SBM (G) was Rs. -886.27 crore in 2015-16, Rs. -320.50 in 2016-17, Rs. 4,197.38 crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 9,890.84 crore in 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018)</em>. States like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances under the programme. As per the MDWS, the reasons for high unspent balance in some states under SBM (G) are: a. Inadequate capacity at grass root level; and b. Existence of revolving funds and leveraging other sources of credit. In its reply to a query by the Standing Committee, the MDWS has said that higher unspent balance in states automatically reduces their eligibility for further fund release in the subsequent year. Due to this specific modality and inbuilt provision in the SBM (G) guidelines, states observe better financial discipline. Strict monitoring methods are adopted to obtain the progress of each district on real time basis using the online monitoring system. Regular review meetings/ video conferences etc. are organized by the MDWS to discuss issues relating to implementation of the SBM (G) and utilization of funds&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull; The Parliamentary Standing Committee has found out that during the year 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018) </em>there was huge unspent balance to the tune of Rs. 9,890.84 crore under the SBM (G). The Committee has observed that the problem of unspent balance is more prominent in certain states as compared to others. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report says that states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh Rs. 2,836.82 crore, in Bihar Rs. 2,764.62 crore, in Madhya Pradesh Rs. 866.68 crore, in Assam Rs. 606.30 crore, in Odisha Rs. 436.71 crore and in Andhra Pradesh Rs. 420.16 crore are lying unspent.<br /> <br /> &bull; The MDWS has claimed about 84 percent of sanitation coverage in the rural areas of India as on 24th May, 2018. However, contrary to the figures that was projected by the Ministry, the Parliamentary Standing Committee while examining the subject says that the sanitation coverage figures seemed to be more on &quot;paper&quot; but the actual progress at the ground level is very lethargic. Even a village with 100 percent household toilets cannot be declared ODF till all the inhabitants start using them, says the report. The main thrust of the government should be on the usage of toilets as mere building of toilets alone is not sufficient for the realization of actual vision of an ODF country.<br /> <br /> &bull; Much more is required to be done so as to bring in &quot;behavioural change&quot; in rural populace so as to attain the real motive behind the SBM (G), says the report. In the wake of this serious concern, the Standing Committee has recommended the MDWS to bring about a radical transformation in the &quot;behavioural&quot; aspects of the rural masses by inculcating in them a sense of hygiene and well-being through mass extensive awareness campaigns and other suitable mechanisms, so that the gap in the figures projected and the ground reality may be abridged for the betterment of the country.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Standing Committee has found that the performance of some of states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha in terms of sanitation is very poor. Appalled by the slackness of sanitation coverage in these states, the Committee enquired from the MDWS about the state of affairs. In response to that, the Ministry has informed that they are aware of it and have given special emphasis to the said states through various innovative measures. In this context, the Secretary of the MDWS candidly admitted before the Standing Committee about the dismal performance of bigger states and assured the Committee that the Government will take all necessary steps and will also provide extra budgetary resources to these states so as to improve the situation. The Parliamentary Standing Committee has observed that the efforts made by the government are not complete if the issue of awareness generation is left behind in this demand driven programme. The Committee has strongly recommended that the MDWS should pay more attention towards pace of sanitation in the low performing states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu &amp; Kashmir and Odisha on a war footing.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Committee is wary of the poor nature of construction and low quality of raw materials being used in the construction of toilets under SBM (G) as found by members themselves and through different feedbacks. The Committee has pressed upon the MDWS to ensure that the quality of raw materials used for construction of toilets under SBM (G) are of a good standard commensurate with the amount being spent as incentive to the beneficiaries without any compromise.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">A Rapid Survey on Swachhta Status was conducted by the NSSO during May-June 2015 alongside its regular 72nd Round (July 2014-June 2015) survey covering 3,788 villages and 2,907 urban blocks. The number of households surveyed was 73,176 in rural India and 41,538 in urban India.<br /> <br /> The survey aims to give a snapshot of the situation on the availability/ accessibility of toilets, solid waste and liquid waste management at sample village/ ward and household levels aggregated at state and country-levels.<br /> <br /> As per the report entitled [inside]Swachhta Status Report 2016[/inside], which has been prepared by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> &bull; Out of the 3788 villages surveyed, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose.<br /> <br /> &bull; From the 2,907 sample urban frame survey (UFS) blocks surveyed at all-India level, 42.0 percent wards were found to have community/ public toilets. At all India-level, 1.6 percent wards were found to be having the community /public toilets but not using them.<br /> <br /> &bull; In 54.9 percent of the villages having community toilets, cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the panchayat or on contract payment. In 17.0 percent villages, it was being done by the residents themselves. However, 22.6 percent villages were such where the community toilets were not being cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, cleaning of community/ public toilets was being done by the persons employed by the local municipal body in 73.1 percent wards having these toilets. 12.2 percent wards were such where the cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the residents&rsquo; welfare association. However, community/ public toilets in 8.6 percent wards were not being cleaned by anybody.<br /> <br /> &bull; About 36.8 percent wards in urban areas reported to have a proper liquid waste disposal system for community/ public toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 36.7 percent villages had pakki nali and 19.0 percent villages had katchi nali as drainage arrangement for waste water coming out of the rural households. 44.4 percent villages had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Almost 56.4 percent wards reported to have sewer network for disposal of liquid waste.<br /> <br /> &bull; 78.1 percent wards reported to have a system of street cleaning.<br /> <br /> &bull; 64.2 percent wards were found to have a dumping place for solid waste. These solid waste dumping places were cleaned every day in case of 48.2 percent wards, on a weekly basis in case of 37.7 percent wards and on a monthly basis in case of 9.3 percent wards.&nbsp; However, 4.9 percent wards were such where the solid waste dumping place was not cleaned.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 50.5 percent of the households kept the garbage at a specified place outside their own house, 24.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the nearby agriculture field, 5.5 percent households kept it at the common place outside the house, 4.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the biogas plant or manure pit whereas 15.1 percent households threw it around the house.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 45.3 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, 88.8 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India for the households having sanitary toilet, percentage of persons using household/ community toilet was 95.6 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India for the households having sanitary toilet, the percentage of persons using household/ community/ public toilet was 98.7 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural India, 42.5 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilet.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, 87.9 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilets.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 52.1 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban India, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 7.5 percent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas, 55.4 percent households contributed to open defecation. This percentage in urban areas was 8.9 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the [inside]Economic Survey 2015-16[/inside], Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>):<br /> <br /> &bull; The Census of India 2011 informs that around 70 percent of India&rsquo;s population (650 million) lives in rural and slum areas. It increases the possibility of exposure of the population to water-borne and vector-borne diseases<br /> <br /> &bull; Only 46.6 percent of households in India have access to drinking water within their premises. A far lower, 43.5 percent of households have access to tap water. Similarly, less than 50 percent households have latrine facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> &bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha.<br /> <br /> &bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all.<br /> <br /> &bull; The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) is accelerating efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage and eliminate open defecation in India by 2 October 2019. It also aims to promote better hygiene amongst the population and improve cleanliness by initiating Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) projects in villages, towns and cities.<br /> <br /> &bull; The progress in sanitation has witnessed a spurt since the launch of the Swachh Bharat Mission. In its first year, i.e. from 2 October 2014 to 2 October 2015, 88 lakh toilets were constructed, against an expected outcome of 60 lakhs. More than 122 lakh toilets have already been constructed in rural areas so far under the mission. Sanitation coverage, which stood at 40.60 percent as per NSSO data, has risen to around 48.8 percent as on 31 December 2015.<br /> <br /> &bull; According to WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme estimates, 61 percent of rural Indians defecate in the open in 2015, compared with only 32 per cent of rural people in sub-Saharan Africa. Even sanitation laggards perform better than India, with 17 percent rural open defecation in Afghanistan and 15 percent in Kenya.<br /> <br /> &bull; In order to improve availability of drinking water in rural areas, the National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) initiated a new project supported by the World Bank, the &lsquo;Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project&ndash;Low Income States&rsquo; with a total cost of Rs. 6000 crore. The project aims to provide safe, 24 x 7 piped drinking water supply to 7.8 million rural population in four low-income States--Assam, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand--that have the lowest piped water supply and sanitation facilities. As on 31 December 2015, the project has implemented 275 single and multi-village piped drinking water supply schemes through the decentralized delivery mechanism of empowered Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committees.<br /> <br /> **page**<br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the United Nations&#39; report entitled: [inside]Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014[/inside] (released in May 2014), (Please&nbsp;<a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Indian scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 92 million people in India and 112 million people in China without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There are 792 million people in India and 478 million people in China without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012.&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Globally, India continues to be the country with the highest number of people (597 million people) practicing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Despite having some of the highest numbers of open defecators, India (597 million people), Nigeria (39 million people) and Indonesia (54 million people) do not feature among those countries making the greatest strides in reducing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population practicing open defecation in India declined from 74 percent in 1990 to 63 percent in 2000 and further to 48 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in India rose from 18 percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2000 and further to 36 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in rural India was 25 percent whereas in urban India it was 60 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in India rose from 70 percent in 1990 to 81 percent in 2000 and further to 93 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in rural India was 91 percent whereas in urban India it was 97 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Global scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990, almost 2 billion people globally have gained access to improved sanitation, and 2.3 billion have gained access to drinking-water from improved sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Some 1.6 billion of these people have piped water connections in their homes or compounds.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; More than half of the global population lives in cities, and urban areas are still better supplied with improved water and sanitation than rural ones. But the gap is decreasing. In 1990, more than 76% people living in urban areas had access to improved sanitation, as opposed to only 28% in rural ones. By 2012, 80% urban dwellers and 47% rural ones had access to better sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 1990, 95% people in urban areas could drink improved water, compared with 62% people in rural ones. By 2012, 96% people living in towns and 82% of those in rural areas had access to improved water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2012, 116 countries had met the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target for drinking water, 77 had met the MDG target for sanitation and 56 countries had met both targets. MDG 7.C aims to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 89% of the global population used improved drinking water sources, a rise of 13 percentage points in 22 years or 2.3 billion people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By the end of 2012, 64% of the global population used improved sanitation facilities, a rise of 15 percentage points since 1990. Some 2.5 billion people &ndash; two-thirds of whom live in Asia, and a quarter in sub-Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sanitation facilities. There are 46 countries where at least half the population is not using an improved sanitation facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Although declining across all regions, open defecation is practised by 1 billion people, 82% of whom live in 10 countries. Nine out of 10 people defecating in the open live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Wealthy people universally have higher access to sanitation than the poor. In some countries this gap is narrowing. The gap is increasing, however, in rural areas of countries with low coverage and for marginalized and excluded groups.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 748 million people &ndash; 90% living in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia (43% in Sub-Saharan Africa, and 47% in Asia) &ndash; still use unimproved drinking water sources; 82% live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to access the salient findings of 69th Round of NSS regarding [inside]Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India (July 2012 to December 2012)[/inside].&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/NSS%2069th%20Round%20drinking%20water%20sanitation%20hygiene%20survey.pdf" title="NSS 69th round drinking water sanitation hygiene survey">click here</a> to download the full report Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th Round, July 2012-December 2012, MoSPI.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the [inside]WHO/UNICEF joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation[/inside],&nbsp;<a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf</a>, are as follows:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India with 626 million people who practice open defecation, has more than twice the number of the next 18 countries combined;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 90 per cent of the 692 million people in South Asia who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 593 million in China and 251 million in India gained access to improved sanitation since 1990.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; China and India account for just under half the global progress on sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Water</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2010, 89 per cent of the world&rsquo;s population, or 6.1 billion people, used improved drinking water sources, exceeding the MDG target (88 per cent); 92 per cent are expected to have access in 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Between 1990 and 2010, two billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Eleven per cent of the global population, or 783 million people, are still without access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In 2015 the WHO/UNICEF JMP projects that 605 million will still not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Sanitation</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 63 per cent of the global population use toilets and other improved sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; By 2015, 67 per cent will have access to improved sanitation facilities (the MDG target is 75 per cent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Since 1990 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 2.5 billion people lack improved sanitation, projected be 2.4 billion by 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 1.1 billion people (15 per cent of the global population) practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; 949 million open defecators live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Countries that account for almost three-quarters of the people who practice open defecation:</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">India (626 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Indonesia (63 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Pakistan (40 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Ethiopia (38 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nigeria (34 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Sudan (19 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nepal (15 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">China (14 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Niger (12 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Burkina Faso (9.7 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Mozambique (9.5 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Cambodia (8.6 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the policy report titled [inside]Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011)[/inside], Water Aid,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf">http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India has made a political commitment of reaching universal access to clean water by 2012. It has made the political commitment of reaching universal access to urban sanitation by 2012 and rural sanitation by 2017.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The population in India without access to water is 147.3 million. The population in India without access to sanitation is 818.4 million (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, 2010).&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008; however, the progress has been highly inequitable, with the poorest households barely benefiting. Only five million from the poorest section benefited compared with 43 million and 93 million from the richest sections.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Whereas every rural household in Sikkim and Kerala has access to sanitation, and states such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana and West Bengal have seen big improvements to access since 2001, in Bihar 73% of rural households lack adequate sanitation, and across India almost a third of the rural population does not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; The five countries with the largest absolute numbers of people without sanitation&ndash;India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan&ndash;are all middle income and account for over 1.7 billion people without sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; WaterAid research in India illustrates how scheduled castes are denied access to water facilities and how scheduled caste children are not allowed to drink water from common sources at school.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; India and China were top 10 recipients for clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) aid for nine and eight years respectively, which is consistent with the fact that these two countries are home to the greatest number of people without water and sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; In India, the cost of construction of Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs) in the Total Sanitation Campaign is expected to be met by Above Poverty Line households, while for Below Poverty Line households, the cost is shared between the Government of India, the state and individual users, with the exact ratio depending on the unit cost of the facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Diarrhoea, 88 percent of which is caused due to lack of access to clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), is now the biggest killer of children in Africa and the second biggest killer of children worldwide. It is responsible for 2.2 million deaths each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Lack of access to water and sanitation is a major drag on economic growth, and costs African and Asian countries up to 6% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Poor people in South Asia are over 13 times less likely to have access to sanitation than the rich; and poor people in Sub-Saharan Africa are over 15 times more likely to practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; There is a rural-urban divide in access to clean water and sanitation. 94% of the urban population in developing countries has access to clean water, compared to 76% &nbsp;in rural areas, and 68% of the urban population has access to improved sanitation, compared with only 40% in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; For families without a drinking-water source at home, it is usually women and girls who go to collect drinking water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost three-quarters of households.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Historically, local natural monopolies have been in public ownership, and about 90% of the world&rsquo;s piped water is delivered by publicly-owned bodies, at both national and municipal levels.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Increasing overall WASH spending to 3.5% of GDP and sanitation to 1% are very large changes from current levels&mdash;but this is the scale of change that is needed if the MDG targets are to be achieved in all regions and LDCs are to get on course for universal access by 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations[/inside] by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010<br /> <a href="http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf">http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf</a>:&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Young children are most at risk of death from unsafe water, and women and children are typically responsible for most water collection.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Multiple randomized trials show that water treatment can cost-effectively reduce reported diarrhea. However, many consumers have low willingness to pay for cleaner water, with less than 10% of households purchasing household water treatment under existing retail models.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Provision of information on water quality can increase demand, but only modestly. Free point of collection water treatment systems designed to make water treatment convenient, salient, and public, combined with a local promoter, can generate take up of more than 60 percent. The projected cost is as low as $20 per year of life saved, comparable to vaccines. In contrast, the limited existing evidence suggests many consumers are willing to pay for better access to water, but it does not yet demonstrate that this improves health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Providing dilute chlorine solution free at the point of water collection, together with a local promoter, can increase take up of water treatment from less than 10 percent to more than 60 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Evidence available from randomized studies suggests that consumers realize substantial non-health benefits from convenient access to water and are willing to pay for this.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Separately identifying how water quantity and quality affect health is important because different water interventions affect water quality and quantity asymmetrically. For example, adding chlorine to water affects quality but not quantity. On the other hand, providing household connections to municipal water supplies to households that currently use standpipes is likely to have a bigger effect on the convenience of obtaining water, and thus on the quantity of water consumed, than on water quality.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Increased availability and convenience of water facilitates more frequent washing of hands, dishes, bodies and clothes, thus reducing disease transmission. There is indeed strong evidence that hand washing is important for health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent collection of self-reported diarrhea data through repeated interviews leads to health protective behavior change in addition to respondent fatigue and social desirability bias.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&bull;&nbsp;Frequent data collection leads to lower reports of child diarrhea by mothers relative to infrequent surveying and also to higher rates of chlorination verified by tests for chlorine in water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page** </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09 (released in 2010)[/inside], National Sample Survey, <a href="http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf">http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The field work of the nationwide survey was carried out during July 2008 to June 2009. The report is based on the Central sample of 1,53,518 households (97,144 in rural areas and 56,374 in urban areas) surveyed from 8,130 sample villages in rural areas and 4,735 urban blocks spread over all States and Union Territories.<br /> <br /> <em>Availability of Drinking Water Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; In rural areas the major source of drinking water (most often used) was &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; in respect of 55 per cent of households followed by &lsquo;tap&rsquo; for 30 per cent of households.<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, &lsquo;tap&rsquo; was the major source of drinking water for 74 per cent of the households and &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; served another 18 per cent households.<br /> <br /> &bull; The three sources of drinking water, &lsquo;tap&rsquo;, &lsquo;tube well/hand pump&rsquo; and &lsquo;well&rsquo; together served nearly 97 per cent of rural households and 95 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 86 per cent of the rural households and 91 per cent of urban households got sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the first major source.<br /> <br /> &bull; Shortage of drinking water set in the month of March and gradually reached a peak during May; thereafter, the situation of availability of drinking water gradually improved and by August the situation improved substantially.<br /> <br /> &bull; During the month of May drinking water for 13 per cent of the rural households and 8 per cent of the urban households was insufficient.<br /> <br /> &bull; Drinking water facility within the premises was available to nearly 41 per cent of rural households and 75 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> <em>Bathroom Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Bathroom facility was not available to nearly 64 per cent of rural households, while in urban areas, the proportion of households with no bathroom was lower, nearly 22 per cent.<br /> <br /> &bull; In the rural areas, detached bathrooms were more common (23 per cent of the households) than were attached bathrooms (13 per cent of the households).<br /> <br /> &bull; In urban areas, a higher proportion of households (48 per cent) had attached bathroom than detached bathroom (nearly 31 per cent).<br /> <br /> <em>Sanitation Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility whereas 11 per cent of urban households did not have any latrine.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 14 per cent of the households in rural areas and 8 per cent in urban areas used pit latrine.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull; In rural areas, septic tank/flush latrine was used by 18 per cent households as compared to 77 per cent households in urban areas.</span><br /> <br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>Electricity Facility</em><br /> <br /> &bull; At the all-India level, nearly 75 per cent of the households had electricity for domestic use. While 66 per cent households in rural areas had this facility, 96 per cent in urban areas had the facility.<br /> <br /> <em>Households With Three Basic Facilities: Drinking Water Within Premises, Latrine and Electricity </em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) whereas in urban areas, all three facilities were available to 68 per cent households.<br /> <br /> <em>Micro Environmental Elements Surrounding the House</em><br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 19 per cent of the households in rural areas and 6 per cent in urban areas had open katcha drainage. Nearly 57 per cent of the households in rural areas and 15 per cent in urban areas had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> &bull; Garbage disposal arrangement was available to only 24 per cent of rural households and 79 per cent of the urban households.<br /> <br /> &bull; Nearly 18 per cent of the rural households and 6 per cent of the urban households had no direct opening to road.</span><br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update (WHO and UNICEF)[/inside], <a href="http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf">http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf</a>: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Use of improved sanitation facilities is low in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Among the 2.6 billion people in the world who do not use improved sanitation facilities, by far the greatest number are in Southern Asia, but there are also large numbers in Eastern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;61% of global population uses improved sanitation facilities</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Unless huge efforts are made, the proportion of people without access to basic sanitation will not be halved by 2015. Even if we meet the MDG target, there will still be 1.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation. If the trend remains as currently projected, an additional billion people who should have benefited from MDG progress will miss out, and by 2015, there will be 2.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;672 million people will still lack access to improved drinking-water sources in 2015.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Sub-Saharan Africa faces the greatest challenge in increasing the use of improved drinking-water. 884 million people &ndash; 37% of whom live in Sub&ndash;Saharan Africa &ndash; still use unimproved sources for drinking-water</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In China, 89% of the population of 1.3 billion uses drinking-water from improved sources, up from 67% in 1990. In India, 88% of the population of 1.2 billion uses drinking-water from such sources, as compared to 72% in 1990. China and India together account for a 47% share, of the 1.8 billion people that gained access to improved drinking-water sources between 1990 and 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For sanitation, even with the increase between 1990 and 2008 in the proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities in China (from 41% to 55%) and India (from 18% to 31%), the world is not on track to meet the sanitation target. This is despite the fact that 475 million people gained access to improved sanitation in these two countries alone, a 38% share of the 1.3 billion people that gained access globally.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the approximately 1.3 billion people who gained access to improved sanitation during the period 1990-2008, 64% live in urban areas.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Worldwide, 87% of the population gets their drinking-water from improved sources, and the corresponding figure for developing regions is also high at 84%. While 94% of the urban population of developing regions uses improved sources, it is only 76% of rural populations.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The rural population without access to an improved drinking-water source is over five times greater than that in urban areas. Of almost 1.8 billion people gaining access to improved drinking-water in the period 1990-2008, 59% live in urban areas. The urban-rural disparities are particularly striking in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are also visible in Asia and Latin America.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The proportion of the world population that practises open defecation declined by almost one third from 25% in 1990 to 17% in 2008. A decline in open defecation rates was recorded in all regions. In Sub-Saharan Africa, open defecation rates fell by 25 per cent. In absolute numbers, the population practising open defecation increased, however, from 188 million in 1990 to 224 million in 2008. In Southern Asia, home to 64% of the world population that defecate in the open, the practice decreased the most &ndash; from 66% in 1990 to 44% in 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 1990 and 2008, more than 1.2 billion people worldwide gained access to a piped connection on premises.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In developing regions, while 73% of the urban population uses piped water from a household connection, only 31% of rural inhabitants have access to household piped water supplies.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;For families without a drinking-water source on the premises, it is usually women who go to the source to collect drinking-water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost two thirds of households, while in almost a quarter of households it is men who usually collect the water. In 12% of households, however, children carry the main responsibility for collecting water, with girls under 15 years of age being twice as likely to carry this responsibility as boys under the age of 15 years.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the study titled [inside]Combating Waterborne Disease at the Household Level (2007)[/inside], prepared by The International Network to Promote Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage and WHO, <a href="http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf">http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf</a>: &nbsp;<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Globally, 1.1 billion lack access to an &ldquo;improved&rdquo; drinking water supply; many more drink water that is grossly contaminated.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4 billion cases of diarrhoea occur annually, of which 88% is attributable to unsafe water, and inadequate sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases, the vast majority children under 5. 90% of diarrhoeal deaths are borne by children under five, mostly in developing countries.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Lack of safe water perpetuates a cycle whereby poor populations become further disadvantaged, and poverty becomes entrenched.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; WHO estimates that 94% of diarrhoeal cases are preventable through modifications to the environment, including through interventions to increase the availability of clean water, and to improve sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A 2005 systematic review concluded that diarrhoeal episodes are reduced by 25% through improving water supply, 32% by improving sanitation, 45% through hand washing, and by 39% via household water treatment and safe storage.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A growing body of research suggests household water treatment and safe storage (HWTS):a. dramatically improves microbial water quality; b. significantly reduces diarrhoea; c. is among the most effective of water, sanitation and health interventions; d. is highly cost-effective; and e. can be rapidly deployed and taken up by vulnerable populations.<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Existing low-cost technologies for safe drinking water are: a. Chlorination &ndash; adding chlorine in liquid or tablet form to drinking water stored in a protected container; b. Solar disinfection &ndash; exposing water in disposable clear plastic bottles to sunlight for a day, typically on the roof of a house; c. Filtration; d. Combined flocculation /disinfection systems&ndash;adding powders or tablets to coagulate and flocculate sediments in water followed by a timed release of disinfectant; e. boiling; f. Safe storage<br /> <br /> &bull;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Many low-cost HWTS technologies do not come with clear labels and reliable accreditations attesting to their ability to provide &ldquo;safe&rdquo; water. This has led to uncertainty and confusion among consumers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> &nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]11th Five Year Plan[/inside]</span><br /> <a href="http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf</span></a>:</p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The status of provision of water and sanitation has improved slowly. According to Census 1991, 55.54% of the rural population had access to an improved water source. As on 1 April 2007, the Department of Drinking Water Supply&rsquo;s figures show that out of a total of 1,50,7349 rural habitations in the country, 74.39% (11,21,366 habitations) are fully covered and 14.64% (2,20,165 habitations) are partially covered. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;Present estimates shows that out of the 2.17 lakh water quality affected habitation as on 1.4.05, about 70,000 habitations have since been addressed for providing safe drinking water.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The access to toilets is even poorer. As per the latest Census data (2001), only 36.4% of the total population has latrines within or attached to their houses. However in rural areas, only 21.9% of population has latrines within or attached to their houses. An estimate based on the number of individual household toilets constructed under the TSC programme (a demand-driven programme implemented since 1999) puts the sanitation coverage in the country at about 49% (as on November 2007). </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;An evaluation study on the programme conducted in 2002 shows 80% of toilets constructed were put to use. This use is expected to be much higher as awareness has improved much since 2002.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;The GoI&rsquo;s major intervention in water sector started in 1972&ndash;73 through Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) for assisting States/Uts to accelerate the coverage of drinking water supply. In 1986, the entire programme was given a mission approach with the launch of the Technology Mission on Drinking Water and Related Water Management. This Technology Mission was later renamed as Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991&ndash;92. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;In 1999, Department of Drinking Water Supply (DDWS) was formed under the MoRD to give emphasis to rural water supply as well as on sanitation. In the same year, new initiatives in water sector had been initiated through Sector Reform Project, later it was scaled up as Swajaldhara in 2002. With sustained interventions, DDWS remains an important institution to support the States/UTs in serving the rural population with water and sanitation related services all across India.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;There are about 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations in the country with more than half of the habitations affected with excess iron (118088). This is followed by fluoride (31306), salinity (23495), nitrate (13958), arsenic (5029) in that order. There are about 25000 habitations affected with multiple problems. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 States. Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam. The hand pump attached de-fluoridation and iron removal plants have failed due to in appropriate technology unsuited to community perceptions and their involvement. Desalination plants have also met a similar fate due to lapses at various levels starting with planning to post implementation maintenance.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">&iuml;&fnof;&tilde;&nbsp;To &lsquo;provide clean drinking water for all by 2009 and ensure that there are no slip-backs by the end of the Eleventh Plan&rsquo; is one of the monitorable targets of the Eleventh Five Year Plan. The first part of the goal coincides with the terminal year of Bharat Nirman Programme under which it is proposed to provide safe drinking water to all habitations. Under the Bharat Nirman Programme 55,067 not covered habitations, 2.8 lakh slipped back habitations, and 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations are proposed to be covered.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">**page**</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif">&nbsp; </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"><em>According to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS AND FIGURES&nbsp; *updated November 2004:</em> </span></span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases (including cholera); 90% are children under 5, mostly in developing countries. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;88% of diarrhoeal disease is attributed to unsafe water supply, inadequate sanitation and hygiene. Improved water supply reduces diarrhoea morbidity by between 6% to 25%, if severe outcomes are included. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improved sanitation reduces diarrhoea morbidity by 32%. Hygiene interventions including hygiene education and promotion of hand washing can lead to a reduction of diarrhoeal cases by up to 45%. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Improvements in drinking-water quality through household water treatment, such as chlorination at point of use, can lead to a reduction of diarrhoea episodes by between 35% and 39%.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;1.3 million people die of malaria each year, 90% of whom are children under 5. There are 396 million episodes of malaria every year, most of the disease burden is in Africa south of the Sahara. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Intensified irrigation, dams and other water related projects contribute importantly to this disease burden. Better management of water resources reduces transmission of malaria and other vector-borne diseases.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world &iacute;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world&rsquo;s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Between 2002 and 2015, the world&rsquo;s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;The development of water resources continues in an accelerated pace to meet the food, fibre and energy needs of a world population of 8 billion by 2025. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">&bull;&nbsp;Lack of capacity for health impact assessment transfers hidden costs to the health sector and increases the disease burden on local communities. Environmental management approaches for health need to be incorporated into strategies for integrated water resources management.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => '', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 12, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-sanitation-55', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 55, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 25 $metaTitle = 'Environment | Water and Sanitation' $metaKeywords = '' $metaDesc = 'KEY TRENDS &nbsp; &bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural...' $disp = '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; According to NSS 76th&nbsp;Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to&nbsp; safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd)&nbsp; and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />&bull; Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu &amp; Kashmir was 81.52 percent,&nbsp; Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&bull; Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />&bull; While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br />&nbsp;<br />&bull; Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG&#39;s Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>)&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please&nbsp;<a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a>&nbsp;to download</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more)&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access &nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify">&nbsp;</div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>environment/water-and-sanitation-55.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>Environment | Water and Sanitation | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content="KEY TRENDS • According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Water and Sanitation</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd) and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />• Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu & Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />• While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> <br />• Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>) </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a> to download</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more) </div><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $cookies = [] $values = [ (int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8' ] $name = 'Content-Type' $first = true $value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
<head>
<link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25, 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd) and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /> <br /> • Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu & Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /> <br /> • While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> • As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> • Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br /> • Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br /> • Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br /> • The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br /> • India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br /> • India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br /> • According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br /> • Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br /> • India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br /> • Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> <br /> • Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br /> • Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br /> • About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> <br /> • Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>) </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a> to download</p> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more) </div> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Report%20No.%209%20of%202021_GWMR_English-061c19df1d9dff7.23091105.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Report no 9 of 2021: Performance Audit of Ground Water Management and Regulation for the period 2013-18 (laid on the floor of the Parliament on 21 December, 2021)[/inside]. Kindly <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/CAG%20Press%20Release%20Groundwater%2021%20Dec%202021.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1UNMLzOUev1axQLA4c-0XyJ5BEYk8mN7NshA-OPmNWf2pmfPd8jvGnc80">click here</a> to access the press release by CAG dated 21 December, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access the key findings of [inside]NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019)[/inside].<br /> <br /> Kindly <a href="mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Report_584_final.pdf">click here</a> to access the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019).<br /> <br /> According to the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019):<br /> <br /> • The major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> • About 48.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 57.5 percent of the households in the urban areas had exclusive access to principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> • Roughly 87.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 90.9 percent of the households in the urban areas had sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the principal source.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 58.2 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 80.7 percent of the households in the urban areas had drinking water facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> • Almost 94.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 97.4 percent of the households in the urban areas used ‘improved source of drinking water’.<br /> <br /> • About 51.4 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 72.0 percent of the households in the urban areas used improved source of drinking water located in the household premises which was sufficiently available throughout the year.<br /> <br /> • Roughly 56.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to bathroom.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to bathroom, about 48.4 percent in the rural areas and about 74.8 percent in the urban areas used bathroom attached to the dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> • About 71.3 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to latrine. It may be noted that there may be respondent bias in the reporting of access to latrine as question on benefits received by the households from government schemes was asked prior to the question on access of households to latrine.<br /> <br /> • The major type of latrine used by the households was flush/pour-flush to septic tank in both rural and urban areas. About 50.9 percent of the households in rural areas and 48.9 percent of the households in urban areas used flush/pour-flush to septic tank type of latrine.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to latrine, about 94.7 percent of the males and 95.7 percent of the females in the rural areas used latrine regularly while about 98.0 percent of the males and 98.1 percent of the females in the urban areas used latrine regularly.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to latrine, about 93.8 percent of the males and 94.6 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine while about 97.2 percent of both males and females in the urban areas regularly used improved latrine.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to latrine, about 85.8 percent of the males and 86.4 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine which was for exclusive use of the household while the corresponding figure was about 82.4 percent for males and 84.7 percent for females in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to latrine, about 3.5 percent of the household members in the rural areas and about 1.7 percent of the household members in the urban areas never used latrine.<br /> <br /> • Among the households used latrine, about 4.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 2.1 percent of the households in the urban areas reported that water was not available in or around the latrine used.<br /> <br /> • Almost 48.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 86.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had bathroom and latrine both within household premises.<br /> <br /> • Roughly 96.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 63.8 percent of the households in the urban areas had own dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, about 96.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.5 percent of the households in the urban areas used the house for residential purpose only.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, about 89.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 56.4 percent of the households in the urban areas had independent house.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, about 76.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.0 percent of the households in the urban areas had the house of pucca structure.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, average floor area of the dwelling unit was about 46.6 sq. mtr. in the rural areas and about 46.1 sq. mtr. in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, about 93.9 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 99.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had electricity for domestic use.<br /> <br /> <br /> **page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the [inside]CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit of National Rural Drinking Water Programme (published on 7th August, 2018)[/inside] in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> • The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) was launched with the objective of providing adequate safe water for drinking, cooking and other domestic needs to every rural person on a sustainable basis. The 12th Plan aimed at providing all rural habitations, schools and anganwadis with safe drinking water by December, 2017. It also envisaged that at least 50 percent of the rural population will be provided piped water supply at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) within the household premises or at a distance of not more than 100 meters from their households.<br /> <br /> • The NRDWP also aimed to provide household connection to 35 percent of rural households. The NRDWP is being implemented in the states through its six components and through other focused schemes. During the 12th FYP period (2012-17), a total of Rs. 89,956 crore (Central share of Rs. 43,691 crore and state share of Rs. 46,265 crore) was provided for the Programme of which Rs. 81,168 crore was spent during this period.<br /> <br /> • The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were set for achievement by 2017 viz. (i) all rural habitations, Government schools and anganwadis to have access to safe drinking water; (ii) 50 per cent of rural population to be provided potable drinking water (55 lpcd) by piped water supply; and (iii) 35 per cent of rural households to be provided household connections.<br /> <br /> • As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by eight percent at 40 lpcd and 5.5 percent at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17.<br /> <br /> • The NRDWP was an important element in Government of India’s commitment to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal Number 6 which relates to ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. The Ministry had informed (September 2017) that while its objective was to provide drinking water to every Indian household, it would require approximately Rs. 23,000 crore annually till 2030 (at present cost) to achieve this goal and given the present level of outlays, the SDG cannot be realized solely through NRDWP efforts.<br /> <br /> • <em>Planning and Delivery Mechanism:</em> The planning and delivery framework established at the Centre and states deviated from the NRDWP guidelines. Twenty one states did not frame Water Security Plans and deficiencies were found in preparation and scrutiny of Annual Action Plans such as lack of stakeholder and community participation, non-inclusion of minimum service level of water in schemes and absence of approval of State Level Scheme Sanctioning Committee for schemes included in the plans. The apex level National Drinking Water and Sanitation Council set up to co-ordinate and ensure convergence remained largely dormant. The agencies vital for planning and execution of the Programme such as State Water and Sanitation Mission, State Technical Agency, Source Finding Committee and Block Resource Centres were either not set up or were not performing their assigned functions. These constraints both in terms of planning and delivery ultimately affected achievement of Programme goals and targets.<br /> <br /> • <em>Fund Management: </em>The NRDWP is implemented as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme with cost being shared between the Central and State Governments. The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation’s expectations that the states would be able to compensate for reduced Central allocation by increasing their own financial commitment to the scheme taking into account the increased devolution based on the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission was belied. Thus, the overall availability of funds for the Programme declined during the period 2013-14 to 2016-17. However, even the reduced allocations of funds remained unutilised. There were delays of over 15 months in release of Central share to nodal/ implementing agencies. There was also diversion of funds towards inadmissible items of expenditure and blocking of funds amounting to Rs. 662.61 crore with State Water and Sanitation Missions and work executing agencies.<br /> <br /> • <em>Programme Implementation:</em> The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were to be achieved by end of 2017 as brought out above. This was attributable partly to deficiencies in implementation such as incomplete, abandoned and non-operational works, unproductive expenditure on equipment, non-functional sustainability structures and gaps in contract management that had a total financial implication of Rs. 2,212.44 crore.<br /> <br /> • Only five percent of quality affected habitations had been provided with Community Water Purification Plants and there was slow progress in setting up such plants out of funds provided by the NITI Aayog. Sustainability plans were either not prepared/ implemented or not included in the Annual Action Plans. There was inadequate focus on surface water based schemes and a large number of schemes (98 percent) including piped water schemes continued to be based on ground water resources. Operation and Maintenance plans were either not prepared in most of the states or had deficiencies leading to schemes becoming non-functional. As a result, incidence of slip-back habitations has persisted. <br /> <br /> • Lastly, lack of required number of labs at states/ district/ sub-divisional level resulted shortfall in prescribed quality tests of water sources and supply thereby compromising the objective of providing safe drinking water to the rural population.<br /> <br /> • <em>Monitoring and Evaluation: </em>Data in the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) of the Programme lacked consistency and accuracy due to insufficient authentication and validation controls. The expert teams for inspection viz. Vigilance and Monitoring Committees to monitor and review implementation of NRDWP were either not established or were not functioning in the planned manner. Social audit of the programme to measure beneficiary level satisfaction was not conducted. Hence, the overall monitoring and oversight framework lacked effectiveness and there was inadequate community involvement in this exercise.<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> Rural sanitation did not feature on the investment horizon during the first five plan periods as reflected in its negligible funding share. However, it received prominence from the Sixth Plan (1980-85) onwards amid the launch of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation decade in 1980, says the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf">51st Report of Standing Committee</a> on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin. India’s first nationwide programme for rural sanitation, the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP), was launched in 1986, in the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) with the objective of improving the quality of life of rural people and to provide privacy and dignity to women. The programme provided large subsidy for construction of sanitary latrines for BPL households.<br /> <br /> The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), was launched with effect from 1st April, 1999 following a ‘community led’ and ‘people centered’ approach. The TSC moved away from the principle of state-wise allocation to a “demand-driven” approach. The programme laid emphasis on Information, Education and Communication (IEC) for generation of effective demand for sanitation facilities. It also laid emphasis on school sanitation and hygiene education for bringing about attitudinal and behavioral changes for adoption of hygienic practices from an early age. <br /> <br /> In order to encourage the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) to take up sanitation promotion, the incentive award scheme of Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP) was launched in 2005. The award was given to those PRIs which attained 100 percent open defecation free environment. This award publicized the sanitation programme significantly across the country.<br /> <br /> Encouraged by the initial success of NGP, and looking into the need to upscale sanitation interventions, the TSC was revamped as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) in 2012, with the objective to accelerate the sanitation coverage in rural areas so as to comprehensively cover rural population through renewed strategies and saturation approach and also to transform rural India into Nirmal Bharat. <br /> <br /> In order to significantly upscale the programme, and bring the nation's focus on the issue of sanitation, the Government of India had launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) viz. SMB (G) on 2nd October, 2014 to accelerate efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in the country by 2nd October, 2019. With the launch of SBM (G), the construction of toilets in schools and anganwadis has been mandated to the Ministry of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Women and Child Development respectively for greater focus.<br /> <br /> Under the SBM, the focus is on behavior change. Community based collective behavior change has been mentioned as the preferred approach, although the states are free to choose the approach best suited to them. Focus is also on creation of complete open defecation free (ODF) villages, rather than only on construction of individual toilets.<br /> <br /> The key findings of the [inside]51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018)[/inside], are as follows <em>(please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access)</em>:<br /> <br /> • The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) was started in 2014 in rural areas of the country. The Cabinet approved the total estimated outlay of Rs. 1,34,386.61 crore for SBM (G). The financial burden of SBM (G) between the Centre and states is in the ratio of 60:40, with the exception of special category states where the share is 90:10. From 2014-15 to 2017-18, the central allocation made for SBM (G) has been Rs. 36,836.27 crore, of which Rs. 36,825.48 crore has been released to the states. For the financial year 2018-2019, an allocation of Rs. 30,343 crore has been made, with Rs. 7,509.82 crore already released to the states as of May 2018. The remaining Rs. 22,833.18 crore is planned to be released during the course of the year.<br /> <br /> • During the time of launch of the SBM (G) on 2nd October, 2014, the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20in%20India%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage in India as on 24th May 2018">sanitation coverage in the country</a> was 38.7 percent. This has increased to 84.13 percent as on 24th May, 2018.<br /> <br /> • <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20across%20states%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage across states as on 24th May 2018">Sanitation coverage as on 24th May</a>, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu & Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent. <br /> <br /> • 386 districts, 3,578 blocks, 1,62,688 gram panchayats and 3,66,774 villages have been declared open defecation free (ODF) as on 24th May, 2018. As on 24th May, 2018, 17 states/ UTs namely Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Mizoram, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Meghalaya, Dadar & Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu, Maharashtra & Andaman & Nicobar Islands have been declared ODF. There are around 3 crore households pending as on 1st April, 2018, which are likely to be benefitted from this scheme in 2018-19.<br /> <br /> • As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20ODF%20villages%20across%20states.jpg" title="Proportion of ODF villages across states">proportion of villages</a>, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent).<br /> <br /> • The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) through an Independent Verification Agency has done the National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey 2017-2018. In that survey, 92,040 households in 6,136 villages across all states were covered. The main findings of survey are: 1. Nearly 77 percent households in rural India have access to toilets <em>[the corresponding figure as per the SBM-G Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) at the midpoint of the survey period was 76 percent]</em>; 2. Roughly 93.4 percent of the households having access to a toilet use regularly; 3. Nearly 95.6 percent ODF verified villages confirmed ODF; 4. About 70 percent of the villages found to have minimal litter and stagnant water; 5. Roughly 70 percent villages found to have minimal stagnant water.<br /> <br /> • According to the MDWS, the number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Household%20toilets%20constructed%20in%20India%20in%20lakhs.jpg" title="Household toilets constructed in India">household toilets constructed</a> was 58 lakhs in 2014-15, 126 lakhs in 2015-16, 218 lakhs in 2016-17 and 294 lakhs in 2017-18.<br /> <br /> • Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/State%20and%20UT%20wise%20IHHLs%20constructed%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="State and UT wise IHHLs constructed under SBM_Gramin">individual household latrines (IHHLs) </a>constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 7.2 crore. Most IHHL construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in Uttar Pradesh (around 98 lakhs), followed by Rajasthan (76.4 lakhs) and Madhya Pradesh (56.2 lakhs). As per the Cabinet Note, 9.72 crore IHHLs <em>(8.84 crore eligible for incentive and 0.88 crore non-eligible for APLs)</em> to be constructed under SBM (G), says the report. <br /> <br /> • As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20persons%20using%20toilets%20for%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202017-18.jpg" title="Proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets in 2017-18">National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey</a> (2017-18), the proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets was the lowest in Tamil Nadu (71.4 percent), followed by Puducherry (78.4 percent), Odisha (85.4 percent), Uttar Pradesh (87.9 percent) and Jharkhand (92.2 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.2 percent.<br /> <br /> • As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20households%20having%20access%20to%20water%20for%20use%20in%20toilets%20out%20of%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202016_1.jpg" title="Proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets in 2016">Swachhata Status Report 2016</a> of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), the proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets was the lowest in Odisha (77.5 percent), followed by Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh (both 84.0 percent), Madhya Pradesh (89.2 percent), West Bengal (89.8 percent) and Bihar (90.0 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.9 percent.<br /> <br /> • Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Community%20Sanitary%20Complexes.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Community Sanitary Complexes (CSC)</a> constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 10,002. Most number of CSCs construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in West Bengal (2,063), followed by Arunachal Pradesh (1,266), Jammu & Kashmir (1,238), Himachal Pradesh (1,081) and Andhra Pradesh (616).<br /> <br /> • The share of Central expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G) was Rs. 3,748.8 lakhs in 2014-15, Rs. 4,311.49 lakhs in 2015-16, Rs. 4,982.04 lakhs in 2016-17 and Rs. 7,484.69 lakhs in 2017-18. There is significant variation across the states in terms of Centre's share of expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G). <br /> <br /> • Although the funds released under the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachh%20Bharat%20Kosh.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Swachh Bharat Kosh</a> of SBM (G) for Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Assam, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Odisha and Tripura was altogether Rs. 399.86 crore, the funds utilised as per the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) was Rs. 129.41 crore. It may be noted that the Swachh Bharat Kosh was set up in 2015 by the Ministry of Finance for channelizing the voluntary contribution from individuals and corporate sectors in response to the call given by Hon'ble Prime Minister to achieve Swachh Bharat by 2nd October, 2019.<br /> <br /> • <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Unspent%20Balances%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="Unspent Balances under SBM_Gramin">Unspent balances</a> under the SBM (G) was Rs. -886.27 crore in 2015-16, Rs. -320.50 in 2016-17, Rs. 4,197.38 crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 9,890.84 crore in 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018)</em>. States like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances under the programme. As per the MDWS, the reasons for high unspent balance in some states under SBM (G) are: a. Inadequate capacity at grass root level; and b. Existence of revolving funds and leveraging other sources of credit. In its reply to a query by the Standing Committee, the MDWS has said that higher unspent balance in states automatically reduces their eligibility for further fund release in the subsequent year. Due to this specific modality and inbuilt provision in the SBM (G) guidelines, states observe better financial discipline. Strict monitoring methods are adopted to obtain the progress of each district on real time basis using the online monitoring system. Regular review meetings/ video conferences etc. are organized by the MDWS to discuss issues relating to implementation of the SBM (G) and utilization of funds <br /> <br /> • The Parliamentary Standing Committee has found out that during the year 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018) </em>there was huge unspent balance to the tune of Rs. 9,890.84 crore under the SBM (G). The Committee has observed that the problem of unspent balance is more prominent in certain states as compared to others. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report says that states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh Rs. 2,836.82 crore, in Bihar Rs. 2,764.62 crore, in Madhya Pradesh Rs. 866.68 crore, in Assam Rs. 606.30 crore, in Odisha Rs. 436.71 crore and in Andhra Pradesh Rs. 420.16 crore are lying unspent.<br /> <br /> • The MDWS has claimed about 84 percent of sanitation coverage in the rural areas of India as on 24th May, 2018. However, contrary to the figures that was projected by the Ministry, the Parliamentary Standing Committee while examining the subject says that the sanitation coverage figures seemed to be more on "paper" but the actual progress at the ground level is very lethargic. Even a village with 100 percent household toilets cannot be declared ODF till all the inhabitants start using them, says the report. The main thrust of the government should be on the usage of toilets as mere building of toilets alone is not sufficient for the realization of actual vision of an ODF country.<br /> <br /> • Much more is required to be done so as to bring in "behavioural change" in rural populace so as to attain the real motive behind the SBM (G), says the report. In the wake of this serious concern, the Standing Committee has recommended the MDWS to bring about a radical transformation in the "behavioural" aspects of the rural masses by inculcating in them a sense of hygiene and well-being through mass extensive awareness campaigns and other suitable mechanisms, so that the gap in the figures projected and the ground reality may be abridged for the betterment of the country.<br /> <br /> • The Standing Committee has found that the performance of some of states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Odisha in terms of sanitation is very poor. Appalled by the slackness of sanitation coverage in these states, the Committee enquired from the MDWS about the state of affairs. In response to that, the Ministry has informed that they are aware of it and have given special emphasis to the said states through various innovative measures. In this context, the Secretary of the MDWS candidly admitted before the Standing Committee about the dismal performance of bigger states and assured the Committee that the Government will take all necessary steps and will also provide extra budgetary resources to these states so as to improve the situation. The Parliamentary Standing Committee has observed that the efforts made by the government are not complete if the issue of awareness generation is left behind in this demand driven programme. The Committee has strongly recommended that the MDWS should pay more attention towards pace of sanitation in the low performing states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Odisha on a war footing.<br /> <br /> • The Committee is wary of the poor nature of construction and low quality of raw materials being used in the construction of toilets under SBM (G) as found by members themselves and through different feedbacks. The Committee has pressed upon the MDWS to ensure that the quality of raw materials used for construction of toilets under SBM (G) are of a good standard commensurate with the amount being spent as incentive to the beneficiaries without any compromise.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">A Rapid Survey on Swachhta Status was conducted by the NSSO during May-June 2015 alongside its regular 72nd Round (July 2014-June 2015) survey covering 3,788 villages and 2,907 urban blocks. The number of households surveyed was 73,176 in rural India and 41,538 in urban India.<br /> <br /> The survey aims to give a snapshot of the situation on the availability/ accessibility of toilets, solid waste and liquid waste management at sample village/ ward and household levels aggregated at state and country-levels.<br /> <br /> As per the report entitled [inside]Swachhta Status Report 2016[/inside], which has been prepared by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> • Out of the 3788 villages surveyed, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose.<br /> <br /> • From the 2,907 sample urban frame survey (UFS) blocks surveyed at all-India level, 42.0 percent wards were found to have community/ public toilets. At all India-level, 1.6 percent wards were found to be having the community /public toilets but not using them.<br /> <br /> • In 54.9 percent of the villages having community toilets, cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the panchayat or on contract payment. In 17.0 percent villages, it was being done by the residents themselves. However, 22.6 percent villages were such where the community toilets were not being cleaned.<br /> <br /> • In urban areas, cleaning of community/ public toilets was being done by the persons employed by the local municipal body in 73.1 percent wards having these toilets. 12.2 percent wards were such where the cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the residents’ welfare association. However, community/ public toilets in 8.6 percent wards were not being cleaned by anybody.<br /> <br /> • About 36.8 percent wards in urban areas reported to have a proper liquid waste disposal system for community/ public toilets.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 36.7 percent villages had pakki nali and 19.0 percent villages had katchi nali as drainage arrangement for waste water coming out of the rural households. 44.4 percent villages had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> • Almost 56.4 percent wards reported to have sewer network for disposal of liquid waste.<br /> <br /> • 78.1 percent wards reported to have a system of street cleaning.<br /> <br /> • 64.2 percent wards were found to have a dumping place for solid waste. These solid waste dumping places were cleaned every day in case of 48.2 percent wards, on a weekly basis in case of 37.7 percent wards and on a monthly basis in case of 9.3 percent wards. However, 4.9 percent wards were such where the solid waste dumping place was not cleaned.<br /> <br /> • In rural areas, 50.5 percent of the households kept the garbage at a specified place outside their own house, 24.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the nearby agriculture field, 5.5 percent households kept it at the common place outside the house, 4.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the biogas plant or manure pit whereas 15.1 percent households threw it around the house.<br /> <br /> • In rural areas, 45.3 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> • In urban areas, 88.8 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> • In rural India for the households having sanitary toilet, percentage of persons using household/ community toilet was 95.6 percent.<br /> <br /> • In urban India for the households having sanitary toilet, the percentage of persons using household/ community/ public toilet was 98.7 percent.<br /> <br /> • In rural India, 42.5 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilet.<br /> <br /> • In urban India, 87.9 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilets.<br /> <br /> • In rural areas, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 52.1 percent.<br /> <br /> • In urban India, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 7.5 percent.<br /> <br /> • In rural areas, 55.4 percent households contributed to open defecation. This percentage in urban areas was 8.9 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the [inside]Economic Survey 2015-16[/inside], Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>):<br /> <br /> • The Census of India 2011 informs that around 70 percent of India’s population (650 million) lives in rural and slum areas. It increases the possibility of exposure of the population to water-borne and vector-borne diseases<br /> <br /> • Only 46.6 percent of households in India have access to drinking water within their premises. A far lower, 43.5 percent of households have access to tap water. Similarly, less than 50 percent households have latrine facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> • While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha.<br /> <br /> • As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all.<br /> <br /> • The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) is accelerating efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage and eliminate open defecation in India by 2 October 2019. It also aims to promote better hygiene amongst the population and improve cleanliness by initiating Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) projects in villages, towns and cities.<br /> <br /> • The progress in sanitation has witnessed a spurt since the launch of the Swachh Bharat Mission. In its first year, i.e. from 2 October 2014 to 2 October 2015, 88 lakh toilets were constructed, against an expected outcome of 60 lakhs. More than 122 lakh toilets have already been constructed in rural areas so far under the mission. Sanitation coverage, which stood at 40.60 percent as per NSSO data, has risen to around 48.8 percent as on 31 December 2015.<br /> <br /> • According to WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme estimates, 61 percent of rural Indians defecate in the open in 2015, compared with only 32 per cent of rural people in sub-Saharan Africa. Even sanitation laggards perform better than India, with 17 percent rural open defecation in Afghanistan and 15 percent in Kenya.<br /> <br /> • In order to improve availability of drinking water in rural areas, the National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) initiated a new project supported by the World Bank, the ‘Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project–Low Income States’ with a total cost of Rs. 6000 crore. The project aims to provide safe, 24 x 7 piped drinking water supply to 7.8 million rural population in four low-income States--Assam, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand--that have the lowest piped water supply and sanitation facilities. As on 31 December 2015, the project has implemented 275 single and multi-village piped drinking water supply schemes through the decentralized delivery mechanism of empowered Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committees.<br /> <br /> **page**<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the United Nations' report entitled: [inside]Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014[/inside] (released in May 2014), (Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a> to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Indian scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• There are 92 million people in India and 112 million people in China without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• There are 792 million people in India and 478 million people in China without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Globally, India continues to be the country with the highest number of people (597 million people) practicing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Despite having some of the highest numbers of open defecators, India (597 million people), Nigeria (39 million people) and Indonesia (54 million people) do not feature among those countries making the greatest strides in reducing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population practicing open defecation in India declined from 74 percent in 1990 to 63 percent in 2000 and further to 48 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in India rose from 18 percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2000 and further to 36 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in rural India was 25 percent whereas in urban India it was 60 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in India rose from 70 percent in 1990 to 81 percent in 2000 and further to 93 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in rural India was 91 percent whereas in urban India it was 97 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Global scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Since 1990, almost 2 billion people globally have gained access to improved sanitation, and 2.3 billion have gained access to drinking-water from improved sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Some 1.6 billion of these people have piped water connections in their homes or compounds.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• More than half of the global population lives in cities, and urban areas are still better supplied with improved water and sanitation than rural ones. But the gap is decreasing. In 1990, more than 76% people living in urban areas had access to improved sanitation, as opposed to only 28% in rural ones. By 2012, 80% urban dwellers and 47% rural ones had access to better sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In 1990, 95% people in urban areas could drink improved water, compared with 62% people in rural ones. By 2012, 96% people living in towns and 82% of those in rural areas had access to improved water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• By 2012, 116 countries had met the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target for drinking water, 77 had met the MDG target for sanitation and 56 countries had met both targets. MDG 7.C aims to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• By the end of 2012, 89% of the global population used improved drinking water sources, a rise of 13 percentage points in 22 years or 2.3 billion people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• By the end of 2012, 64% of the global population used improved sanitation facilities, a rise of 15 percentage points since 1990. Some 2.5 billion people – two-thirds of whom live in Asia, and a quarter in sub-Saharan Africa – still use unimproved sanitation facilities. There are 46 countries where at least half the population is not using an improved sanitation facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Although declining across all regions, open defecation is practised by 1 billion people, 82% of whom live in 10 countries. Nine out of 10 people defecating in the open live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Wealthy people universally have higher access to sanitation than the poor. In some countries this gap is narrowing. The gap is increasing, however, in rural areas of countries with low coverage and for marginalized and excluded groups.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 748 million people – 90% living in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia (43% in Sub-Saharan Africa, and 47% in Asia) – still use unimproved drinking water sources; 82% live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to access the salient findings of 69th Round of NSS regarding [inside]Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India (July 2012 to December 2012)[/inside]. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/NSS%2069th%20Round%20drinking%20water%20sanitation%20hygiene%20survey.pdf" title="NSS 69th round drinking water sanitation hygiene survey">click here</a> to download the full report Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th Round, July 2012-December 2012, MoSPI.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the [inside]WHO/UNICEF joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation[/inside], <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf</a>, are as follows: </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India with 626 million people who practice open defecation, has more than twice the number of the next 18 countries combined;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India accounts for 90 per cent of the 692 million people in South Asia who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 593 million in China and 251 million in India gained access to improved sanitation since 1990.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• China and India account for just under half the global progress on sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Water</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In 2010, 89 per cent of the world’s population, or 6.1 billion people, used improved drinking water sources, exceeding the MDG target (88 per cent); 92 per cent are expected to have access in 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Between 1990 and 2010, two billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Eleven per cent of the global population, or 783 million people, are still without access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In 2015 the WHO/UNICEF JMP projects that 605 million will still not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Sanitation</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 63 per cent of the global population use toilets and other improved sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• By 2015, 67 per cent will have access to improved sanitation facilities (the MDG target is 75 per cent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Since 1990 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 2.5 billion people lack improved sanitation, projected be 2.4 billion by 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 1.1 billion people (15 per cent of the global population) practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 949 million open defecators live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Countries that account for almost three-quarters of the people who practice open defecation:</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">India (626 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Indonesia (63 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Pakistan (40 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Ethiopia (38 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nigeria (34 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Sudan (19 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nepal (15 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">China (14 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Niger (12 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Burkina Faso (9.7 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Mozambique (9.5 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Cambodia (8.6 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the policy report titled [inside]Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011)[/inside], Water Aid, <a href="http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf">http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf</a>: </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India has made a political commitment of reaching universal access to clean water by 2012. It has made the political commitment of reaching universal access to urban sanitation by 2012 and rural sanitation by 2017.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The population in India without access to water is 147.3 million. The population in India without access to sanitation is 818.4 million (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, 2010). </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008; however, the progress has been highly inequitable, with the poorest households barely benefiting. Only five million from the poorest section benefited compared with 43 million and 93 million from the richest sections.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Whereas every rural household in Sikkim and Kerala has access to sanitation, and states such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana and West Bengal have seen big improvements to access since 2001, in Bihar 73% of rural households lack adequate sanitation, and across India almost a third of the rural population does not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The five countries with the largest absolute numbers of people without sanitation–India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan–are all middle income and account for over 1.7 billion people without sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• WaterAid research in India illustrates how scheduled castes are denied access to water facilities and how scheduled caste children are not allowed to drink water from common sources at school.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India and China were top 10 recipients for clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) aid for nine and eight years respectively, which is consistent with the fact that these two countries are home to the greatest number of people without water and sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In India, the cost of construction of Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs) in the Total Sanitation Campaign is expected to be met by Above Poverty Line households, while for Below Poverty Line households, the cost is shared between the Government of India, the state and individual users, with the exact ratio depending on the unit cost of the facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Diarrhoea, 88 percent of which is caused due to lack of access to clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), is now the biggest killer of children in Africa and the second biggest killer of children worldwide. It is responsible for 2.2 million deaths each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Lack of access to water and sanitation is a major drag on economic growth, and costs African and Asian countries up to 6% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Poor people in South Asia are over 13 times less likely to have access to sanitation than the rich; and poor people in Sub-Saharan Africa are over 15 times more likely to practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• There is a rural-urban divide in access to clean water and sanitation. 94% of the urban population in developing countries has access to clean water, compared to 76% in rural areas, and 68% of the urban population has access to improved sanitation, compared with only 40% in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• For families without a drinking-water source at home, it is usually women and girls who go to collect drinking water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost three-quarters of households.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Historically, local natural monopolies have been in public ownership, and about 90% of the world’s piped water is delivered by publicly-owned bodies, at both national and municipal levels.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Increasing overall WASH spending to 3.5% of GDP and sanitation to 1% are very large changes from current levels—but this is the scale of change that is needed if the MDG targets are to be achieved in all regions and LDCs are to get on course for universal access by 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations[/inside] by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010<br /> <a href="http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf">http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf</a>: </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Young children are most at risk of death from unsafe water, and women and children are typically responsible for most water collection.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Multiple randomized trials show that water treatment can cost-effectively reduce reported diarrhea. However, many consumers have low willingness to pay for cleaner water, with less than 10% of households purchasing household water treatment under existing retail models.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Provision of information on water quality can increase demand, but only modestly. Free point of collection water treatment systems designed to make water treatment convenient, salient, and public, combined with a local promoter, can generate take up of more than 60 percent. The projected cost is as low as $20 per year of life saved, comparable to vaccines. In contrast, the limited existing evidence suggests many consumers are willing to pay for better access to water, but it does not yet demonstrate that this improves health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Providing dilute chlorine solution free at the point of water collection, together with a local promoter, can increase take up of water treatment from less than 10 percent to more than 60 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Evidence available from randomized studies suggests that consumers realize substantial non-health benefits from convenient access to water and are willing to pay for this.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Separately identifying how water quantity and quality affect health is important because different water interventions affect water quality and quantity asymmetrically. For example, adding chlorine to water affects quality but not quantity. On the other hand, providing household connections to municipal water supplies to households that currently use standpipes is likely to have a bigger effect on the convenience of obtaining water, and thus on the quantity of water consumed, than on water quality.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Increased availability and convenience of water facilitates more frequent washing of hands, dishes, bodies and clothes, thus reducing disease transmission. There is indeed strong evidence that hand washing is important for health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Frequent collection of self-reported diarrhea data through repeated interviews leads to health protective behavior change in addition to respondent fatigue and social desirability bias.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Frequent data collection leads to lower reports of child diarrhea by mothers relative to infrequent surveying and also to higher rates of chlorination verified by tests for chlorine in water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page** </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09 (released in 2010)[/inside], National Sample Survey, <a href="http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf">http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf</a>: <br /> <br /> • The field work of the nationwide survey was carried out during July 2008 to June 2009. The report is based on the Central sample of 1,53,518 households (97,144 in rural areas and 56,374 in urban areas) surveyed from 8,130 sample villages in rural areas and 4,735 urban blocks spread over all States and Union Territories.<br /> <br /> <em>Availability of Drinking Water Facility</em><br /> <br /> • In rural areas the major source of drinking water (most often used) was ‘tube well/hand pump’ in respect of 55 per cent of households followed by ‘tap’ for 30 per cent of households.<br /> <br /> • In urban areas, ‘tap’ was the major source of drinking water for 74 per cent of the households and ‘tube well/hand pump’ served another 18 per cent households.<br /> <br /> • The three sources of drinking water, ‘tap’, ‘tube well/hand pump’ and ‘well’ together served nearly 97 per cent of rural households and 95 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 86 per cent of the rural households and 91 per cent of urban households got sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the first major source.<br /> <br /> • Shortage of drinking water set in the month of March and gradually reached a peak during May; thereafter, the situation of availability of drinking water gradually improved and by August the situation improved substantially.<br /> <br /> • During the month of May drinking water for 13 per cent of the rural households and 8 per cent of the urban households was insufficient.<br /> <br /> • Drinking water facility within the premises was available to nearly 41 per cent of rural households and 75 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> <em>Bathroom Facility</em><br /> <br /> • Bathroom facility was not available to nearly 64 per cent of rural households, while in urban areas, the proportion of households with no bathroom was lower, nearly 22 per cent.<br /> <br /> • In the rural areas, detached bathrooms were more common (23 per cent of the households) than were attached bathrooms (13 per cent of the households).<br /> <br /> • In urban areas, a higher proportion of households (48 per cent) had attached bathroom than detached bathroom (nearly 31 per cent).<br /> <br /> <em>Sanitation Facility</em><br /> <br /> • Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility whereas 11 per cent of urban households did not have any latrine.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 14 per cent of the households in rural areas and 8 per cent in urban areas used pit latrine.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In rural areas, septic tank/flush latrine was used by 18 per cent households as compared to 77 per cent households in urban areas.</span><br /> <br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>Electricity Facility</em><br /> <br /> • At the all-India level, nearly 75 per cent of the households had electricity for domestic use. While 66 per cent households in rural areas had this facility, 96 per cent in urban areas had the facility.<br /> <br /> <em>Households With Three Basic Facilities: Drinking Water Within Premises, Latrine and Electricity </em><br /> <br /> • Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) whereas in urban areas, all three facilities were available to 68 per cent households.<br /> <br /> <em>Micro Environmental Elements Surrounding the House</em><br /> <br /> • Nearly 19 per cent of the households in rural areas and 6 per cent in urban areas had open katcha drainage. Nearly 57 per cent of the households in rural areas and 15 per cent in urban areas had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> • Garbage disposal arrangement was available to only 24 per cent of rural households and 79 per cent of the urban households.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 18 per cent of the rural households and 6 per cent of the urban households had no direct opening to road.</span><br /> <br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update (WHO and UNICEF)[/inside], <a href="http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf">http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf</a>: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Use of improved sanitation facilities is low in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Among the 2.6 billion people in the world who do not use improved sanitation facilities, by far the greatest number are in Southern Asia, but there are also large numbers in Eastern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• 61% of global population uses improved sanitation facilities</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Unless huge efforts are made, the proportion of people without access to basic sanitation will not be halved by 2015. Even if we meet the MDG target, there will still be 1.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation. If the trend remains as currently projected, an additional billion people who should have benefited from MDG progress will miss out, and by 2015, there will be 2.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• 672 million people will still lack access to improved drinking-water sources in 2015.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Sub-Saharan Africa faces the greatest challenge in increasing the use of improved drinking-water. 884 million people – 37% of whom live in Sub–Saharan Africa – still use unimproved sources for drinking-water</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• In China, 89% of the population of 1.3 billion uses drinking-water from improved sources, up from 67% in 1990. In India, 88% of the population of 1.2 billion uses drinking-water from such sources, as compared to 72% in 1990. China and India together account for a 47% share, of the 1.8 billion people that gained access to improved drinking-water sources between 1990 and 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• For sanitation, even with the increase between 1990 and 2008 in the proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities in China (from 41% to 55%) and India (from 18% to 31%), the world is not on track to meet the sanitation target. This is despite the fact that 475 million people gained access to improved sanitation in these two countries alone, a 38% share of the 1.3 billion people that gained access globally.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Of the approximately 1.3 billion people who gained access to improved sanitation during the period 1990-2008, 64% live in urban areas.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Worldwide, 87% of the population gets their drinking-water from improved sources, and the corresponding figure for developing regions is also high at 84%. While 94% of the urban population of developing regions uses improved sources, it is only 76% of rural populations.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• The rural population without access to an improved drinking-water source is over five times greater than that in urban areas. Of almost 1.8 billion people gaining access to improved drinking-water in the period 1990-2008, 59% live in urban areas. The urban-rural disparities are particularly striking in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are also visible in Asia and Latin America.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• The proportion of the world population that practises open defecation declined by almost one third from 25% in 1990 to 17% in 2008. A decline in open defecation rates was recorded in all regions. In Sub-Saharan Africa, open defecation rates fell by 25 per cent. In absolute numbers, the population practising open defecation increased, however, from 188 million in 1990 to 224 million in 2008. In Southern Asia, home to 64% of the world population that defecate in the open, the practice decreased the most – from 66% in 1990 to 44% in 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Between 1990 and 2008, more than 1.2 billion people worldwide gained access to a piped connection on premises.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• In developing regions, while 73% of the urban population uses piped water from a household connection, only 31% of rural inhabitants have access to household piped water supplies.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• For families without a drinking-water source on the premises, it is usually women who go to the source to collect drinking-water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost two thirds of households, while in almost a quarter of households it is men who usually collect the water. In 12% of households, however, children carry the main responsibility for collecting water, with girls under 15 years of age being twice as likely to carry this responsibility as boys under the age of 15 years.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the study titled [inside]Combating Waterborne Disease at the Household Level (2007)[/inside], prepared by The International Network to Promote Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage and WHO, <a href="http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf">http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf</a>: <br /> <br /> • Globally, 1.1 billion lack access to an “improved” drinking water supply; many more drink water that is grossly contaminated.<br /> <br /> • 4 billion cases of diarrhoea occur annually, of which 88% is attributable to unsafe water, and inadequate sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> • 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases, the vast majority children under 5. 90% of diarrhoeal deaths are borne by children under five, mostly in developing countries.<br /> <br /> • Lack of safe water perpetuates a cycle whereby poor populations become further disadvantaged, and poverty becomes entrenched.<br /> <br /> • WHO estimates that 94% of diarrhoeal cases are preventable through modifications to the environment, including through interventions to increase the availability of clean water, and to improve sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> • A 2005 systematic review concluded that diarrhoeal episodes are reduced by 25% through improving water supply, 32% by improving sanitation, 45% through hand washing, and by 39% via household water treatment and safe storage.<br /> <br /> • A growing body of research suggests household water treatment and safe storage (HWTS):a. dramatically improves microbial water quality; b. significantly reduces diarrhoea; c. is among the most effective of water, sanitation and health interventions; d. is highly cost-effective; and e. can be rapidly deployed and taken up by vulnerable populations.<br /> <br /> • Existing low-cost technologies for safe drinking water are: a. Chlorination – adding chlorine in liquid or tablet form to drinking water stored in a protected container; b. Solar disinfection – exposing water in disposable clear plastic bottles to sunlight for a day, typically on the roof of a house; c. Filtration; d. Combined flocculation /disinfection systems–adding powders or tablets to coagulate and flocculate sediments in water followed by a timed release of disinfectant; e. boiling; f. Safe storage<br /> <br /> • Many low-cost HWTS technologies do not come with clear labels and reliable accreditations attesting to their ability to provide “safe” water. This has led to uncertainty and confusion among consumers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]11th Five Year Plan[/inside]</span><br /> <a href="http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf</span></a>:</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> The status of provision of water and sanitation has improved slowly. According to Census 1991, 55.54% of the rural population had access to an improved water source. As on 1 April 2007, the Department of Drinking Water Supply’s figures show that out of a total of 1,50,7349 rural habitations in the country, 74.39% (11,21,366 habitations) are fully covered and 14.64% (2,20,165 habitations) are partially covered. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> Present estimates shows that out of the 2.17 lakh water quality affected habitation as on 1.4.05, about 70,000 habitations have since been addressed for providing safe drinking water.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> The access to toilets is even poorer. As per the latest Census data (2001), only 36.4% of the total population has latrines within or attached to their houses. However in rural areas, only 21.9% of population has latrines within or attached to their houses. An estimate based on the number of individual household toilets constructed under the TSC programme (a demand-driven programme implemented since 1999) puts the sanitation coverage in the country at about 49% (as on November 2007). </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> An evaluation study on the programme conducted in 2002 shows 80% of toilets constructed were put to use. This use is expected to be much higher as awareness has improved much since 2002.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> The GoI’s major intervention in water sector started in 1972–73 through Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) for assisting States/Uts to accelerate the coverage of drinking water supply. In 1986, the entire programme was given a mission approach with the launch of the Technology Mission on Drinking Water and Related Water Management. This Technology Mission was later renamed as Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991–92. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> In 1999, Department of Drinking Water Supply (DDWS) was formed under the MoRD to give emphasis to rural water supply as well as on sanitation. In the same year, new initiatives in water sector had been initiated through Sector Reform Project, later it was scaled up as Swajaldhara in 2002. With sustained interventions, DDWS remains an important institution to support the States/UTs in serving the rural population with water and sanitation related services all across India.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> There are about 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations in the country with more than half of the habitations affected with excess iron (118088). This is followed by fluoride (31306), salinity (23495), nitrate (13958), arsenic (5029) in that order. There are about 25000 habitations affected with multiple problems. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 States. Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam. The hand pump attached de-fluoridation and iron removal plants have failed due to in appropriate technology unsuited to community perceptions and their involvement. Desalination plants have also met a similar fate due to lapses at various levels starting with planning to post implementation maintenance.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> To ‘provide clean drinking water for all by 2009 and ensure that there are no slip-backs by the end of the Eleventh Plan’ is one of the monitorable targets of the Eleventh Five Year Plan. The first part of the goal coincides with the terminal year of Bharat Nirman Programme under which it is proposed to provide safe drinking water to all habitations. Under the Bharat Nirman Programme 55,067 not covered habitations, 2.8 lakh slipped back habitations, and 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations are proposed to be covered.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">**page**</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"> </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"><em>According to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS AND FIGURES *updated November 2004:</em> </span></span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases (including cholera); 90% are children under 5, mostly in developing countries. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• 88% of diarrhoeal disease is attributed to unsafe water supply, inadequate sanitation and hygiene. Improved water supply reduces diarrhoea morbidity by between 6% to 25%, if severe outcomes are included. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Improved sanitation reduces diarrhoea morbidity by 32%. Hygiene interventions including hygiene education and promotion of hand washing can lead to a reduction of diarrhoeal cases by up to 45%. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Improvements in drinking-water quality through household water treatment, such as chlorination at point of use, can lead to a reduction of diarrhoea episodes by between 35% and 39%.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• 1.3 million people die of malaria each year, 90% of whom are children under 5. There are 396 million episodes of malaria every year, most of the disease burden is in Africa south of the Sahara. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Intensified irrigation, dams and other water related projects contribute importantly to this disease burden. Better management of water resources reduces transmission of malaria and other vector-borne diseases.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world’s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Between 2002 and 2015, the world ís population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world’s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Between 2002 and 2015, the world’s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The development of water resources continues in an accelerated pace to meet the food, fibre and energy needs of a world population of 8 billion by 2025. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Lack of capacity for health impact assessment transfers hidden costs to the health sector and increases the disease burden on local communities. Environmental management approaches for health need to be incorporated into strategies for integrated water resources management.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => '', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 12, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-sanitation-55', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 55, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [[maximum depth reached]], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 25, 'metaTitle' => 'Environment | Water and Sanitation', 'metaKeywords' => '', 'metaDesc' => 'KEY TRENDS • According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural...', 'disp' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd) and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />• Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu & Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />• While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> <br />• Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>) </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a> to download</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more) </div><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 25, 'title' => 'Water and Sanitation', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd) and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /> <br /> • Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu & Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /> <br /> • While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> • As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /> <br /> • Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br /> • Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br /> • Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br /> • The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br /> • India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br /> • India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br /> • According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br /> • Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br /> • India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br /> • Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> <br /> • Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br /> • Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br /> • About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> <br /> • Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>) </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a> to download</p> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more) </div> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p> <div style="text-align:justify"> </div> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page**</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/Report%20No.%209%20of%202021_GWMR_English-061c19df1d9dff7.23091105.pdf">click here</a> to access the [inside]Report no 9 of 2021: Performance Audit of Ground Water Management and Regulation for the period 2013-18 (laid on the floor of the Parliament on 21 December, 2021)[/inside]. Kindly <a href="https://im4change.org/upload/files/CAG%20Press%20Release%20Groundwater%2021%20Dec%202021.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1UNMLzOUev1axQLA4c-0XyJ5BEYk8mN7NshA-OPmNWf2pmfPd8jvGnc80">click here</a> to access the press release by CAG dated 21 December, 2021.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><strong>---</strong></p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access the key findings of [inside]NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019)[/inside].<br /> <br /> Kindly <a href="mospi.gov.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/Report_584_final.pdf">click here</a> to access the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019).<br /> <br /> According to the NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019):<br /> <br /> • The major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> • About 48.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 57.5 percent of the households in the urban areas had exclusive access to principal source of drinking water.<br /> <br /> • Roughly 87.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 90.9 percent of the households in the urban areas had sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the principal source.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 58.2 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 80.7 percent of the households in the urban areas had drinking water facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> • Almost 94.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 97.4 percent of the households in the urban areas used ‘improved source of drinking water’.<br /> <br /> • About 51.4 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 72.0 percent of the households in the urban areas used improved source of drinking water located in the household premises which was sufficiently available throughout the year.<br /> <br /> • Roughly 56.6 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to bathroom.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to bathroom, about 48.4 percent in the rural areas and about 74.8 percent in the urban areas used bathroom attached to the dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> • About 71.3 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.2 percent of the households in the urban areas had access to latrine. It may be noted that there may be respondent bias in the reporting of access to latrine as question on benefits received by the households from government schemes was asked prior to the question on access of households to latrine.<br /> <br /> • The major type of latrine used by the households was flush/pour-flush to septic tank in both rural and urban areas. About 50.9 percent of the households in rural areas and 48.9 percent of the households in urban areas used flush/pour-flush to septic tank type of latrine.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to latrine, about 94.7 percent of the males and 95.7 percent of the females in the rural areas used latrine regularly while about 98.0 percent of the males and 98.1 percent of the females in the urban areas used latrine regularly.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to latrine, about 93.8 percent of the males and 94.6 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine while about 97.2 percent of both males and females in the urban areas regularly used improved latrine.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to latrine, about 85.8 percent of the males and 86.4 percent of the females in the rural areas regularly used improved latrine which was for exclusive use of the household while the corresponding figure was about 82.4 percent for males and 84.7 percent for females in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> • Among the households which had access to latrine, about 3.5 percent of the household members in the rural areas and about 1.7 percent of the household members in the urban areas never used latrine.<br /> <br /> • Among the households used latrine, about 4.5 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 2.1 percent of the households in the urban areas reported that water was not available in or around the latrine used.<br /> <br /> • Almost 48.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 86.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had bathroom and latrine both within household premises.<br /> <br /> • Roughly 96.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 63.8 percent of the households in the urban areas had own dwelling unit.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, about 96.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 91.5 percent of the households in the urban areas used the house for residential purpose only.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, about 89.0 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 56.4 percent of the households in the urban areas had independent house.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, about 76.7 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 96.0 percent of the households in the urban areas had the house of pucca structure.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, average floor area of the dwelling unit was about 46.6 sq. mtr. in the rural areas and about 46.1 sq. mtr. in the urban areas.<br /> <br /> • Among the households living in houses, about 93.9 percent of the households in the rural areas and about 99.1 percent of the households in the urban areas had electricity for domestic use.<br /> <br /> <br /> **page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify">The key findings of the [inside]CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit of National Rural Drinking Water Programme (published on 7th August, 2018)[/inside] in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation are as follows (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> • The National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) was launched with the objective of providing adequate safe water for drinking, cooking and other domestic needs to every rural person on a sustainable basis. The 12th Plan aimed at providing all rural habitations, schools and anganwadis with safe drinking water by December, 2017. It also envisaged that at least 50 percent of the rural population will be provided piped water supply at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) within the household premises or at a distance of not more than 100 meters from their households.<br /> <br /> • The NRDWP also aimed to provide household connection to 35 percent of rural households. The NRDWP is being implemented in the states through its six components and through other focused schemes. During the 12th FYP period (2012-17), a total of Rs. 89,956 crore (Central share of Rs. 43,691 crore and state share of Rs. 46,265 crore) was provided for the Programme of which Rs. 81,168 crore was spent during this period.<br /> <br /> • The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were set for achievement by 2017 viz. (i) all rural habitations, Government schools and anganwadis to have access to safe drinking water; (ii) 50 per cent of rural population to be provided potable drinking water (55 lpcd) by piped water supply; and (iii) 35 per cent of rural households to be provided household connections.<br /> <br /> • As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by eight percent at 40 lpcd and 5.5 percent at 55 litre per capita per day (lpcd) after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17.<br /> <br /> • The NRDWP was an important element in Government of India’s commitment to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal Number 6 which relates to ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all. The Ministry had informed (September 2017) that while its objective was to provide drinking water to every Indian household, it would require approximately Rs. 23,000 crore annually till 2030 (at present cost) to achieve this goal and given the present level of outlays, the SDG cannot be realized solely through NRDWP efforts.<br /> <br /> • <em>Planning and Delivery Mechanism:</em> The planning and delivery framework established at the Centre and states deviated from the NRDWP guidelines. Twenty one states did not frame Water Security Plans and deficiencies were found in preparation and scrutiny of Annual Action Plans such as lack of stakeholder and community participation, non-inclusion of minimum service level of water in schemes and absence of approval of State Level Scheme Sanctioning Committee for schemes included in the plans. The apex level National Drinking Water and Sanitation Council set up to co-ordinate and ensure convergence remained largely dormant. The agencies vital for planning and execution of the Programme such as State Water and Sanitation Mission, State Technical Agency, Source Finding Committee and Block Resource Centres were either not set up or were not performing their assigned functions. These constraints both in terms of planning and delivery ultimately affected achievement of Programme goals and targets.<br /> <br /> • <em>Fund Management: </em>The NRDWP is implemented as a Centrally Sponsored Scheme with cost being shared between the Central and State Governments. The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation’s expectations that the states would be able to compensate for reduced Central allocation by increasing their own financial commitment to the scheme taking into account the increased devolution based on the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission was belied. Thus, the overall availability of funds for the Programme declined during the period 2013-14 to 2016-17. However, even the reduced allocations of funds remained unutilised. There were delays of over 15 months in release of Central share to nodal/ implementing agencies. There was also diversion of funds towards inadmissible items of expenditure and blocking of funds amounting to Rs. 662.61 crore with State Water and Sanitation Missions and work executing agencies.<br /> <br /> • <em>Programme Implementation:</em> The NRDWP failed to achieve the targets that were to be achieved by end of 2017 as brought out above. This was attributable partly to deficiencies in implementation such as incomplete, abandoned and non-operational works, unproductive expenditure on equipment, non-functional sustainability structures and gaps in contract management that had a total financial implication of Rs. 2,212.44 crore.<br /> <br /> • Only five percent of quality affected habitations had been provided with Community Water Purification Plants and there was slow progress in setting up such plants out of funds provided by the NITI Aayog. Sustainability plans were either not prepared/ implemented or not included in the Annual Action Plans. There was inadequate focus on surface water based schemes and a large number of schemes (98 percent) including piped water schemes continued to be based on ground water resources. Operation and Maintenance plans were either not prepared in most of the states or had deficiencies leading to schemes becoming non-functional. As a result, incidence of slip-back habitations has persisted. <br /> <br /> • Lastly, lack of required number of labs at states/ district/ sub-divisional level resulted shortfall in prescribed quality tests of water sources and supply thereby compromising the objective of providing safe drinking water to the rural population.<br /> <br /> • <em>Monitoring and Evaluation: </em>Data in the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) of the Programme lacked consistency and accuracy due to insufficient authentication and validation controls. The expert teams for inspection viz. Vigilance and Monitoring Committees to monitor and review implementation of NRDWP were either not established or were not functioning in the planned manner. Social audit of the programme to measure beneficiary level satisfaction was not conducted. Hence, the overall monitoring and oversight framework lacked effectiveness and there was inadequate community involvement in this exercise.<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> Rural sanitation did not feature on the investment horizon during the first five plan periods as reflected in its negligible funding share. However, it received prominence from the Sixth Plan (1980-85) onwards amid the launch of the International Drinking Water Supply and Sanitation decade in 1980, says the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf">51st Report of Standing Committee</a> on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin. India’s first nationwide programme for rural sanitation, the Central Rural Sanitation Programme (CRSP), was launched in 1986, in the Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) with the objective of improving the quality of life of rural people and to provide privacy and dignity to women. The programme provided large subsidy for construction of sanitary latrines for BPL households.<br /> <br /> The Total Sanitation Campaign (TSC), was launched with effect from 1st April, 1999 following a ‘community led’ and ‘people centered’ approach. The TSC moved away from the principle of state-wise allocation to a “demand-driven” approach. The programme laid emphasis on Information, Education and Communication (IEC) for generation of effective demand for sanitation facilities. It also laid emphasis on school sanitation and hygiene education for bringing about attitudinal and behavioral changes for adoption of hygienic practices from an early age. <br /> <br /> In order to encourage the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) to take up sanitation promotion, the incentive award scheme of Nirmal Gram Puraskar (NGP) was launched in 2005. The award was given to those PRIs which attained 100 percent open defecation free environment. This award publicized the sanitation programme significantly across the country.<br /> <br /> Encouraged by the initial success of NGP, and looking into the need to upscale sanitation interventions, the TSC was revamped as the Nirmal Bharat Abhiyan (NBA) in 2012, with the objective to accelerate the sanitation coverage in rural areas so as to comprehensively cover rural population through renewed strategies and saturation approach and also to transform rural India into Nirmal Bharat. <br /> <br /> In order to significantly upscale the programme, and bring the nation's focus on the issue of sanitation, the Government of India had launched the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) viz. SMB (G) on 2nd October, 2014 to accelerate efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage, improve cleanliness and eliminate open defecation in the country by 2nd October, 2019. With the launch of SBM (G), the construction of toilets in schools and anganwadis has been mandated to the Ministry of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Women and Child Development respectively for greater focus.<br /> <br /> Under the SBM, the focus is on behavior change. Community based collective behavior change has been mentioned as the preferred approach, although the states are free to choose the approach best suited to them. Focus is also on creation of complete open defecation free (ODF) villages, rather than only on construction of individual toilets.<br /> <br /> The key findings of the [inside]51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018)[/inside], are as follows <em>(please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access)</em>:<br /> <br /> • The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) was started in 2014 in rural areas of the country. The Cabinet approved the total estimated outlay of Rs. 1,34,386.61 crore for SBM (G). The financial burden of SBM (G) between the Centre and states is in the ratio of 60:40, with the exception of special category states where the share is 90:10. From 2014-15 to 2017-18, the central allocation made for SBM (G) has been Rs. 36,836.27 crore, of which Rs. 36,825.48 crore has been released to the states. For the financial year 2018-2019, an allocation of Rs. 30,343 crore has been made, with Rs. 7,509.82 crore already released to the states as of May 2018. The remaining Rs. 22,833.18 crore is planned to be released during the course of the year.<br /> <br /> • During the time of launch of the SBM (G) on 2nd October, 2014, the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20in%20India%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage in India as on 24th May 2018">sanitation coverage in the country</a> was 38.7 percent. This has increased to 84.13 percent as on 24th May, 2018.<br /> <br /> • <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Sanitation%20coverage%20across%20states%20as%20on%2024th%20May%202018.jpg" title="Sanitation coverage across states as on 24th May 2018">Sanitation coverage as on 24th May</a>, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu & Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent. <br /> <br /> • 386 districts, 3,578 blocks, 1,62,688 gram panchayats and 3,66,774 villages have been declared open defecation free (ODF) as on 24th May, 2018. As on 24th May, 2018, 17 states/ UTs namely Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Mizoram, Chandigarh, Chhattisgarh, Meghalaya, Dadar & Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu, Maharashtra & Andaman & Nicobar Islands have been declared ODF. There are around 3 crore households pending as on 1st April, 2018, which are likely to be benefitted from this scheme in 2018-19.<br /> <br /> • As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20ODF%20villages%20across%20states.jpg" title="Proportion of ODF villages across states">proportion of villages</a>, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent).<br /> <br /> • The Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) through an Independent Verification Agency has done the National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey 2017-2018. In that survey, 92,040 households in 6,136 villages across all states were covered. The main findings of survey are: 1. Nearly 77 percent households in rural India have access to toilets <em>[the corresponding figure as per the SBM-G Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) at the midpoint of the survey period was 76 percent]</em>; 2. Roughly 93.4 percent of the households having access to a toilet use regularly; 3. Nearly 95.6 percent ODF verified villages confirmed ODF; 4. About 70 percent of the villages found to have minimal litter and stagnant water; 5. Roughly 70 percent villages found to have minimal stagnant water.<br /> <br /> • According to the MDWS, the number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Household%20toilets%20constructed%20in%20India%20in%20lakhs.jpg" title="Household toilets constructed in India">household toilets constructed</a> was 58 lakhs in 2014-15, 126 lakhs in 2015-16, 218 lakhs in 2016-17 and 294 lakhs in 2017-18.<br /> <br /> • Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/State%20and%20UT%20wise%20IHHLs%20constructed%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="State and UT wise IHHLs constructed under SBM_Gramin">individual household latrines (IHHLs) </a>constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 7.2 crore. Most IHHL construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in Uttar Pradesh (around 98 lakhs), followed by Rajasthan (76.4 lakhs) and Madhya Pradesh (56.2 lakhs). As per the Cabinet Note, 9.72 crore IHHLs <em>(8.84 crore eligible for incentive and 0.88 crore non-eligible for APLs)</em> to be constructed under SBM (G), says the report. <br /> <br /> • As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20persons%20using%20toilets%20for%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202017-18.jpg" title="Proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets in 2017-18">National Annual Rural Sanitation Survey</a> (2017-18), the proportion of persons using toilets for the households having toilets was the lowest in Tamil Nadu (71.4 percent), followed by Puducherry (78.4 percent), Odisha (85.4 percent), Uttar Pradesh (87.9 percent) and Jharkhand (92.2 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.2 percent.<br /> <br /> • As per the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Proportion%20of%20households%20having%20access%20to%20water%20for%20use%20in%20toilets%20out%20of%20the%20households%20having%20toilets%20in%202016_1.jpg" title="Proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets in 2016">Swachhata Status Report 2016</a> of National Sample Survey Office (NSSO), the proportion of households having access to water for use in toilets out of the households having toilets was the lowest in Odisha (77.5 percent), followed by Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh (both 84.0 percent), Madhya Pradesh (89.2 percent), West Bengal (89.8 percent) and Bihar (90.0 percent). At the national level, this figure was 93.9 percent.<br /> <br /> • Between 2nd October, 2014 and 24th May, 2018, the total number of <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Community%20Sanitary%20Complexes.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Community Sanitary Complexes (CSC)</a> constructed in India under the SBM (G) was nearly 10,002. Most number of CSCs construction under the SBM (G) during this span took place in West Bengal (2,063), followed by Arunachal Pradesh (1,266), Jammu & Kashmir (1,238), Himachal Pradesh (1,081) and Andhra Pradesh (616).<br /> <br /> • The share of Central expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G) was Rs. 3,748.8 lakhs in 2014-15, Rs. 4,311.49 lakhs in 2015-16, Rs. 4,982.04 lakhs in 2016-17 and Rs. 7,484.69 lakhs in 2017-18. There is significant variation across the states in terms of Centre's share of expenditure for Solid and Liquid Waste Management under the SBM (G). <br /> <br /> • Although the funds released under the <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachh%20Bharat%20Kosh.jpg" title="Community Sanitary Complexes">Swachh Bharat Kosh</a> of SBM (G) for Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Assam, Maharashtra, Mizoram, Odisha and Tripura was altogether Rs. 399.86 crore, the funds utilised as per the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) was Rs. 129.41 crore. It may be noted that the Swachh Bharat Kosh was set up in 2015 by the Ministry of Finance for channelizing the voluntary contribution from individuals and corporate sectors in response to the call given by Hon'ble Prime Minister to achieve Swachh Bharat by 2nd October, 2019.<br /> <br /> • <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Unspent%20Balances%20under%20SBM_Gramin.jpg" title="Unspent Balances under SBM_Gramin">Unspent balances</a> under the SBM (G) was Rs. -886.27 crore in 2015-16, Rs. -320.50 in 2016-17, Rs. 4,197.38 crore in 2017-18 and Rs. 9,890.84 crore in 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018)</em>. States like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances under the programme. As per the MDWS, the reasons for high unspent balance in some states under SBM (G) are: a. Inadequate capacity at grass root level; and b. Existence of revolving funds and leveraging other sources of credit. In its reply to a query by the Standing Committee, the MDWS has said that higher unspent balance in states automatically reduces their eligibility for further fund release in the subsequent year. Due to this specific modality and inbuilt provision in the SBM (G) guidelines, states observe better financial discipline. Strict monitoring methods are adopted to obtain the progress of each district on real time basis using the online monitoring system. Regular review meetings/ video conferences etc. are organized by the MDWS to discuss issues relating to implementation of the SBM (G) and utilization of funds <br /> <br /> • The Parliamentary Standing Committee has found out that during the year 2018-19 <em>(as on 24th May, 2018) </em>there was huge unspent balance to the tune of Rs. 9,890.84 crore under the SBM (G). The Committee has observed that the problem of unspent balance is more prominent in certain states as compared to others. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report says that states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir and Uttar Pradesh have large amount of unspent balances. For instance, in Uttar Pradesh Rs. 2,836.82 crore, in Bihar Rs. 2,764.62 crore, in Madhya Pradesh Rs. 866.68 crore, in Assam Rs. 606.30 crore, in Odisha Rs. 436.71 crore and in Andhra Pradesh Rs. 420.16 crore are lying unspent.<br /> <br /> • The MDWS has claimed about 84 percent of sanitation coverage in the rural areas of India as on 24th May, 2018. However, contrary to the figures that was projected by the Ministry, the Parliamentary Standing Committee while examining the subject says that the sanitation coverage figures seemed to be more on "paper" but the actual progress at the ground level is very lethargic. Even a village with 100 percent household toilets cannot be declared ODF till all the inhabitants start using them, says the report. The main thrust of the government should be on the usage of toilets as mere building of toilets alone is not sufficient for the realization of actual vision of an ODF country.<br /> <br /> • Much more is required to be done so as to bring in "behavioural change" in rural populace so as to attain the real motive behind the SBM (G), says the report. In the wake of this serious concern, the Standing Committee has recommended the MDWS to bring about a radical transformation in the "behavioural" aspects of the rural masses by inculcating in them a sense of hygiene and well-being through mass extensive awareness campaigns and other suitable mechanisms, so that the gap in the figures projected and the ground reality may be abridged for the betterment of the country.<br /> <br /> • The Standing Committee has found that the performance of some of states such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Odisha in terms of sanitation is very poor. Appalled by the slackness of sanitation coverage in these states, the Committee enquired from the MDWS about the state of affairs. In response to that, the Ministry has informed that they are aware of it and have given special emphasis to the said states through various innovative measures. In this context, the Secretary of the MDWS candidly admitted before the Standing Committee about the dismal performance of bigger states and assured the Committee that the Government will take all necessary steps and will also provide extra budgetary resources to these states so as to improve the situation. The Parliamentary Standing Committee has observed that the efforts made by the government are not complete if the issue of awareness generation is left behind in this demand driven programme. The Committee has strongly recommended that the MDWS should pay more attention towards pace of sanitation in the low performing states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir and Odisha on a war footing.<br /> <br /> • The Committee is wary of the poor nature of construction and low quality of raw materials being used in the construction of toilets under SBM (G) as found by members themselves and through different feedbacks. The Committee has pressed upon the MDWS to ensure that the quality of raw materials used for construction of toilets under SBM (G) are of a good standard commensurate with the amount being spent as incentive to the beneficiaries without any compromise.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">A Rapid Survey on Swachhta Status was conducted by the NSSO during May-June 2015 alongside its regular 72nd Round (July 2014-June 2015) survey covering 3,788 villages and 2,907 urban blocks. The number of households surveyed was 73,176 in rural India and 41,538 in urban India.<br /> <br /> The survey aims to give a snapshot of the situation on the availability/ accessibility of toilets, solid waste and liquid waste management at sample village/ ward and household levels aggregated at state and country-levels.<br /> <br /> As per the report entitled [inside]Swachhta Status Report 2016[/inside], which has been prepared by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access):<br /> <br /> • Out of the 3788 villages surveyed, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose.<br /> <br /> • From the 2,907 sample urban frame survey (UFS) blocks surveyed at all-India level, 42.0 percent wards were found to have community/ public toilets. At all India-level, 1.6 percent wards were found to be having the community /public toilets but not using them.<br /> <br /> • In 54.9 percent of the villages having community toilets, cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the panchayat or on contract payment. In 17.0 percent villages, it was being done by the residents themselves. However, 22.6 percent villages were such where the community toilets were not being cleaned.<br /> <br /> • In urban areas, cleaning of community/ public toilets was being done by the persons employed by the local municipal body in 73.1 percent wards having these toilets. 12.2 percent wards were such where the cleaning was being done by the persons employed by the residents’ welfare association. However, community/ public toilets in 8.6 percent wards were not being cleaned by anybody.<br /> <br /> • About 36.8 percent wards in urban areas reported to have a proper liquid waste disposal system for community/ public toilets.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 36.7 percent villages had pakki nali and 19.0 percent villages had katchi nali as drainage arrangement for waste water coming out of the rural households. 44.4 percent villages had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> • Almost 56.4 percent wards reported to have sewer network for disposal of liquid waste.<br /> <br /> • 78.1 percent wards reported to have a system of street cleaning.<br /> <br /> • 64.2 percent wards were found to have a dumping place for solid waste. These solid waste dumping places were cleaned every day in case of 48.2 percent wards, on a weekly basis in case of 37.7 percent wards and on a monthly basis in case of 9.3 percent wards. However, 4.9 percent wards were such where the solid waste dumping place was not cleaned.<br /> <br /> • In rural areas, 50.5 percent of the households kept the garbage at a specified place outside their own house, 24.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the nearby agriculture field, 5.5 percent households kept it at the common place outside the house, 4.4 percent households disposed of the garbage in the biogas plant or manure pit whereas 15.1 percent households threw it around the house.<br /> <br /> • In rural areas, 45.3 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> • In urban areas, 88.8 percent households reported to have sanitary toilets.<br /> <br /> • In rural India for the households having sanitary toilet, percentage of persons using household/ community toilet was 95.6 percent.<br /> <br /> • In urban India for the households having sanitary toilet, the percentage of persons using household/ community/ public toilet was 98.7 percent.<br /> <br /> • In rural India, 42.5 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilet.<br /> <br /> • In urban India, 87.9 percent households were found to have access to water for use in toilets.<br /> <br /> • In rural areas, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 52.1 percent.<br /> <br /> • In urban India, the percentage of persons going for open defecation was estimated to be 7.5 percent.<br /> <br /> • In rural areas, 55.4 percent households contributed to open defecation. This percentage in urban areas was 8.9 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the [inside]Economic Survey 2015-16[/inside], Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>):<br /> <br /> • The Census of India 2011 informs that around 70 percent of India’s population (650 million) lives in rural and slum areas. It increases the possibility of exposure of the population to water-borne and vector-borne diseases<br /> <br /> • Only 46.6 percent of households in India have access to drinking water within their premises. A far lower, 43.5 percent of households have access to tap water. Similarly, less than 50 percent households have latrine facilities within the household premises.<br /> <br /> • While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha.<br /> <br /> • As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all.<br /> <br /> • The Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) is accelerating efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage and eliminate open defecation in India by 2 October 2019. It also aims to promote better hygiene amongst the population and improve cleanliness by initiating Solid and Liquid Waste Management (SLWM) projects in villages, towns and cities.<br /> <br /> • The progress in sanitation has witnessed a spurt since the launch of the Swachh Bharat Mission. In its first year, i.e. from 2 October 2014 to 2 October 2015, 88 lakh toilets were constructed, against an expected outcome of 60 lakhs. More than 122 lakh toilets have already been constructed in rural areas so far under the mission. Sanitation coverage, which stood at 40.60 percent as per NSSO data, has risen to around 48.8 percent as on 31 December 2015.<br /> <br /> • According to WHO and UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme estimates, 61 percent of rural Indians defecate in the open in 2015, compared with only 32 per cent of rural people in sub-Saharan Africa. Even sanitation laggards perform better than India, with 17 percent rural open defecation in Afghanistan and 15 percent in Kenya.<br /> <br /> • In order to improve availability of drinking water in rural areas, the National Rural Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP) initiated a new project supported by the World Bank, the ‘Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Project–Low Income States’ with a total cost of Rs. 6000 crore. The project aims to provide safe, 24 x 7 piped drinking water supply to 7.8 million rural population in four low-income States--Assam, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Jharkhand--that have the lowest piped water supply and sanitation facilities. As on 31 December 2015, the project has implemented 275 single and multi-village piped drinking water supply schemes through the decentralized delivery mechanism of empowered Gram Panchayat Water and Sanitation Committees.<br /> <br /> **page**<br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the United Nations' report entitled: [inside]Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014[/inside] (released in May 2014), (Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a> to download):</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Indian scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• There are 92 million people in India and 112 million people in China without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• There are 792 million people in India and 478 million people in China without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Globally, India continues to be the country with the highest number of people (597 million people) practicing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Despite having some of the highest numbers of open defecators, India (597 million people), Nigeria (39 million people) and Indonesia (54 million people) do not feature among those countries making the greatest strides in reducing open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population practicing open defecation in India declined from 74 percent in 1990 to 63 percent in 2000 and further to 48 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in India rose from 18 percent in 1990 to 25 percent in 2000 and further to 36 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population having access to improved sanitation in rural India was 25 percent whereas in urban India it was 60 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in India rose from 70 percent in 1990 to 81 percent in 2000 and further to 93 percent in 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The percentage of population having access to improved drinking water source in rural India was 91 percent whereas in urban India it was 97 percent during 2012.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em><strong>Global scenario</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Since 1990, almost 2 billion people globally have gained access to improved sanitation, and 2.3 billion have gained access to drinking-water from improved sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Some 1.6 billion of these people have piped water connections in their homes or compounds.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• More than half of the global population lives in cities, and urban areas are still better supplied with improved water and sanitation than rural ones. But the gap is decreasing. In 1990, more than 76% people living in urban areas had access to improved sanitation, as opposed to only 28% in rural ones. By 2012, 80% urban dwellers and 47% rural ones had access to better sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In 1990, 95% people in urban areas could drink improved water, compared with 62% people in rural ones. By 2012, 96% people living in towns and 82% of those in rural areas had access to improved water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• By 2012, 116 countries had met the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target for drinking water, 77 had met the MDG target for sanitation and 56 countries had met both targets. MDG 7.C aims to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• By the end of 2012, 89% of the global population used improved drinking water sources, a rise of 13 percentage points in 22 years or 2.3 billion people.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• By the end of 2012, 64% of the global population used improved sanitation facilities, a rise of 15 percentage points since 1990. Some 2.5 billion people – two-thirds of whom live in Asia, and a quarter in sub-Saharan Africa – still use unimproved sanitation facilities. There are 46 countries where at least half the population is not using an improved sanitation facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Although declining across all regions, open defecation is practised by 1 billion people, 82% of whom live in 10 countries. Nine out of 10 people defecating in the open live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Wealthy people universally have higher access to sanitation than the poor. In some countries this gap is narrowing. The gap is increasing, however, in rural areas of countries with low coverage and for marginalized and excluded groups.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 748 million people – 90% living in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia (43% in Sub-Saharan Africa, and 47% in Asia) – still use unimproved drinking water sources; 82% live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to access the salient findings of 69th Round of NSS regarding [inside]Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India (July 2012 to December 2012)[/inside]. </p> <p style="text-align:justify">Please <a href="tinymce/uploaded/NSS%2069th%20Round%20drinking%20water%20sanitation%20hygiene%20survey.pdf" title="NSS 69th round drinking water sanitation hygiene survey">click here</a> to download the full report Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th Round, July 2012-December 2012, MoSPI.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Key findings of the [inside]WHO/UNICEF joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation[/inside], <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf</a>, are as follows: </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India with 626 million people who practice open defecation, has more than twice the number of the next 18 countries combined;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India accounts for 90 per cent of the 692 million people in South Asia who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation;</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 593 million in China and 251 million in India gained access to improved sanitation since 1990.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• China and India account for just under half the global progress on sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Water</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In 2010, 89 per cent of the world’s population, or 6.1 billion people, used improved drinking water sources, exceeding the MDG target (88 per cent); 92 per cent are expected to have access in 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Between 1990 and 2010, two billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Eleven per cent of the global population, or 783 million people, are still without access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In 2015 the WHO/UNICEF JMP projects that 605 million will still not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Sanitation</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 63 per cent of the global population use toilets and other improved sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• By 2015, 67 per cent will have access to improved sanitation facilities (the MDG target is 75 per cent).</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Since 1990 1.8 billion people gained access to improved sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 2.5 billion people lack improved sanitation, projected be 2.4 billion by 2015.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 1.1 billion people (15 per cent of the global population) practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• 949 million open defecators live in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><em>Countries that account for almost three-quarters of the people who practice open defecation:</em></p> <p style="text-align:justify">India (626 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Indonesia (63 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Pakistan (40 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Ethiopia (38 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nigeria (34 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Sudan (19 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Nepal (15 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">China (14 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Niger (12 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Burkina Faso (9.7 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Mozambique (9.5 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify">Cambodia (8.6 million)</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page** </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the policy report titled [inside]Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011)[/inside], Water Aid, <a href="http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf">http://www.wateraid.org/documents/Off-track-off-target.pdf</a>: </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India has made a political commitment of reaching universal access to clean water by 2012. It has made the political commitment of reaching universal access to urban sanitation by 2012 and rural sanitation by 2017.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The population in India without access to water is 147.3 million. The population in India without access to sanitation is 818.4 million (WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme, 2010). </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008; however, the progress has been highly inequitable, with the poorest households barely benefiting. Only five million from the poorest section benefited compared with 43 million and 93 million from the richest sections.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Whereas every rural household in Sikkim and Kerala has access to sanitation, and states such as Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Haryana and West Bengal have seen big improvements to access since 2001, in Bihar 73% of rural households lack adequate sanitation, and across India almost a third of the rural population does not have access.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• The five countries with the largest absolute numbers of people without sanitation–India, China, Indonesia, Nigeria and Pakistan–are all middle income and account for over 1.7 billion people without sanitation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• WaterAid research in India illustrates how scheduled castes are denied access to water facilities and how scheduled caste children are not allowed to drink water from common sources at school.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• India and China were top 10 recipients for clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) aid for nine and eight years respectively, which is consistent with the fact that these two countries are home to the greatest number of people without water and sanitation facilities.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• In India, the cost of construction of Individual Household Latrines (IHHLs) in the Total Sanitation Campaign is expected to be met by Above Poverty Line households, while for Below Poverty Line households, the cost is shared between the Government of India, the state and individual users, with the exact ratio depending on the unit cost of the facility.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Diarrhoea, 88 percent of which is caused due to lack of access to clean drinking water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), is now the biggest killer of children in Africa and the second biggest killer of children worldwide. It is responsible for 2.2 million deaths each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Lack of access to water and sanitation is a major drag on economic growth, and costs African and Asian countries up to 6% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) each year.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Poor people in South Asia are over 13 times less likely to have access to sanitation than the rich; and poor people in Sub-Saharan Africa are over 15 times more likely to practice open defecation.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• There is a rural-urban divide in access to clean water and sanitation. 94% of the urban population in developing countries has access to clean water, compared to 76% in rural areas, and 68% of the urban population has access to improved sanitation, compared with only 40% in rural areas.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• For families without a drinking-water source at home, it is usually women and girls who go to collect drinking water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost three-quarters of households.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Historically, local natural monopolies have been in public ownership, and about 90% of the world’s piped water is delivered by publicly-owned bodies, at both national and municipal levels.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Increasing overall WASH spending to 3.5% of GDP and sanitation to 1% are very large changes from current levels—but this is the scale of change that is needed if the MDG targets are to be achieved in all regions and LDCs are to get on course for universal access by 2020.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to [inside]Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations[/inside] by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010<br /> <a href="http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf">http://www.economics.harvard.edu/files/faculty/36_ARRE_CLEAN_2010_04_14.pdf</a>: </p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Young children are most at risk of death from unsafe water, and women and children are typically responsible for most water collection.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Multiple randomized trials show that water treatment can cost-effectively reduce reported diarrhea. However, many consumers have low willingness to pay for cleaner water, with less than 10% of households purchasing household water treatment under existing retail models.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Provision of information on water quality can increase demand, but only modestly. Free point of collection water treatment systems designed to make water treatment convenient, salient, and public, combined with a local promoter, can generate take up of more than 60 percent. The projected cost is as low as $20 per year of life saved, comparable to vaccines. In contrast, the limited existing evidence suggests many consumers are willing to pay for better access to water, but it does not yet demonstrate that this improves health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Providing dilute chlorine solution free at the point of water collection, together with a local promoter, can increase take up of water treatment from less than 10 percent to more than 60 percent.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Evidence available from randomized studies suggests that consumers realize substantial non-health benefits from convenient access to water and are willing to pay for this.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Separately identifying how water quantity and quality affect health is important because different water interventions affect water quality and quantity asymmetrically. For example, adding chlorine to water affects quality but not quantity. On the other hand, providing household connections to municipal water supplies to households that currently use standpipes is likely to have a bigger effect on the convenience of obtaining water, and thus on the quantity of water consumed, than on water quality.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Increased availability and convenience of water facilitates more frequent washing of hands, dishes, bodies and clothes, thus reducing disease transmission. There is indeed strong evidence that hand washing is important for health.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Frequent collection of self-reported diarrhea data through repeated interviews leads to health protective behavior change in addition to respondent fatigue and social desirability bias.</p> <p style="text-align:justify">• Frequent data collection leads to lower reports of child diarrhea by mothers relative to infrequent surveying and also to higher rates of chlorination verified by tests for chlorine in water.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">**page** </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><br /> According to [inside]Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09 (released in 2010)[/inside], National Sample Survey, <a href="http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf">http://mospi.nic.in/Mospi_New/upload/press_note_535_15nov10.pdf</a>: <br /> <br /> • The field work of the nationwide survey was carried out during July 2008 to June 2009. The report is based on the Central sample of 1,53,518 households (97,144 in rural areas and 56,374 in urban areas) surveyed from 8,130 sample villages in rural areas and 4,735 urban blocks spread over all States and Union Territories.<br /> <br /> <em>Availability of Drinking Water Facility</em><br /> <br /> • In rural areas the major source of drinking water (most often used) was ‘tube well/hand pump’ in respect of 55 per cent of households followed by ‘tap’ for 30 per cent of households.<br /> <br /> • In urban areas, ‘tap’ was the major source of drinking water for 74 per cent of the households and ‘tube well/hand pump’ served another 18 per cent households.<br /> <br /> • The three sources of drinking water, ‘tap’, ‘tube well/hand pump’ and ‘well’ together served nearly 97 per cent of rural households and 95 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 86 per cent of the rural households and 91 per cent of urban households got sufficient drinking water throughout the year from the first major source.<br /> <br /> • Shortage of drinking water set in the month of March and gradually reached a peak during May; thereafter, the situation of availability of drinking water gradually improved and by August the situation improved substantially.<br /> <br /> • During the month of May drinking water for 13 per cent of the rural households and 8 per cent of the urban households was insufficient.<br /> <br /> • Drinking water facility within the premises was available to nearly 41 per cent of rural households and 75 per cent of urban households.<br /> <br /> <em>Bathroom Facility</em><br /> <br /> • Bathroom facility was not available to nearly 64 per cent of rural households, while in urban areas, the proportion of households with no bathroom was lower, nearly 22 per cent.<br /> <br /> • In the rural areas, detached bathrooms were more common (23 per cent of the households) than were attached bathrooms (13 per cent of the households).<br /> <br /> • In urban areas, a higher proportion of households (48 per cent) had attached bathroom than detached bathroom (nearly 31 per cent).<br /> <br /> <em>Sanitation Facility</em><br /> <br /> • Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility whereas 11 per cent of urban households did not have any latrine.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 14 per cent of the households in rural areas and 8 per cent in urban areas used pit latrine.</p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In rural areas, septic tank/flush latrine was used by 18 per cent households as compared to 77 per cent households in urban areas.</span><br /> <br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium"><em>Electricity Facility</em><br /> <br /> • At the all-India level, nearly 75 per cent of the households had electricity for domestic use. While 66 per cent households in rural areas had this facility, 96 per cent in urban areas had the facility.<br /> <br /> <em>Households With Three Basic Facilities: Drinking Water Within Premises, Latrine and Electricity </em><br /> <br /> • Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) whereas in urban areas, all three facilities were available to 68 per cent households.<br /> <br /> <em>Micro Environmental Elements Surrounding the House</em><br /> <br /> • Nearly 19 per cent of the households in rural areas and 6 per cent in urban areas had open katcha drainage. Nearly 57 per cent of the households in rural areas and 15 per cent in urban areas had no drainage arrangement.<br /> <br /> • Garbage disposal arrangement was available to only 24 per cent of rural households and 79 per cent of the urban households.<br /> <br /> • Nearly 18 per cent of the rural households and 6 per cent of the urban households had no direct opening to road.</span><br /> <br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">According to [inside]Progress on Sanitation and Drinking-Water: 2010 Update (WHO and UNICEF)[/inside], <a href="http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf">http://www.unicef.org/media/files/JMP-2010Final.pdf</a>: </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Use of improved sanitation facilities is low in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Among the 2.6 billion people in the world who do not use improved sanitation facilities, by far the greatest number are in Southern Asia, but there are also large numbers in Eastern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• 61% of global population uses improved sanitation facilities</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Unless huge efforts are made, the proportion of people without access to basic sanitation will not be halved by 2015. Even if we meet the MDG target, there will still be 1.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation. If the trend remains as currently projected, an additional billion people who should have benefited from MDG progress will miss out, and by 2015, there will be 2.7 billion people without access to basic sanitation.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• 672 million people will still lack access to improved drinking-water sources in 2015.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Sub-Saharan Africa faces the greatest challenge in increasing the use of improved drinking-water. 884 million people – 37% of whom live in Sub–Saharan Africa – still use unimproved sources for drinking-water</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• In China, 89% of the population of 1.3 billion uses drinking-water from improved sources, up from 67% in 1990. In India, 88% of the population of 1.2 billion uses drinking-water from such sources, as compared to 72% in 1990. China and India together account for a 47% share, of the 1.8 billion people that gained access to improved drinking-water sources between 1990 and 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• For sanitation, even with the increase between 1990 and 2008 in the proportion of the population using improved sanitation facilities in China (from 41% to 55%) and India (from 18% to 31%), the world is not on track to meet the sanitation target. This is despite the fact that 475 million people gained access to improved sanitation in these two countries alone, a 38% share of the 1.3 billion people that gained access globally.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Of the approximately 1.3 billion people who gained access to improved sanitation during the period 1990-2008, 64% live in urban areas.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Worldwide, 87% of the population gets their drinking-water from improved sources, and the corresponding figure for developing regions is also high at 84%. While 94% of the urban population of developing regions uses improved sources, it is only 76% of rural populations.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• The rural population without access to an improved drinking-water source is over five times greater than that in urban areas. Of almost 1.8 billion people gaining access to improved drinking-water in the period 1990-2008, 59% live in urban areas. The urban-rural disparities are particularly striking in Sub-Saharan Africa, but are also visible in Asia and Latin America.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• The proportion of the world population that practises open defecation declined by almost one third from 25% in 1990 to 17% in 2008. A decline in open defecation rates was recorded in all regions. In Sub-Saharan Africa, open defecation rates fell by 25 per cent. In absolute numbers, the population practising open defecation increased, however, from 188 million in 1990 to 224 million in 2008. In Southern Asia, home to 64% of the world population that defecate in the open, the practice decreased the most – from 66% in 1990 to 44% in 2008.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• Between 1990 and 2008, more than 1.2 billion people worldwide gained access to a piped connection on premises.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• In developing regions, while 73% of the urban population uses piped water from a household connection, only 31% of rural inhabitants have access to household piped water supplies.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial; font-size:medium">• For families without a drinking-water source on the premises, it is usually women who go to the source to collect drinking-water. Surveys from 45 developing countries show that this is the case in almost two thirds of households, while in almost a quarter of households it is men who usually collect the water. In 12% of households, however, children carry the main responsibility for collecting water, with girls under 15 years of age being twice as likely to carry this responsibility as boys under the age of 15 years.</span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">**page**</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify">According to the study titled [inside]Combating Waterborne Disease at the Household Level (2007)[/inside], prepared by The International Network to Promote Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage and WHO, <a href="http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf">http://www.who.int/household_water/advocacy/combating_disease.pdf</a>: <br /> <br /> • Globally, 1.1 billion lack access to an “improved” drinking water supply; many more drink water that is grossly contaminated.<br /> <br /> • 4 billion cases of diarrhoea occur annually, of which 88% is attributable to unsafe water, and inadequate sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> • 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases, the vast majority children under 5. 90% of diarrhoeal deaths are borne by children under five, mostly in developing countries.<br /> <br /> • Lack of safe water perpetuates a cycle whereby poor populations become further disadvantaged, and poverty becomes entrenched.<br /> <br /> • WHO estimates that 94% of diarrhoeal cases are preventable through modifications to the environment, including through interventions to increase the availability of clean water, and to improve sanitation and hygiene.<br /> <br /> • A 2005 systematic review concluded that diarrhoeal episodes are reduced by 25% through improving water supply, 32% by improving sanitation, 45% through hand washing, and by 39% via household water treatment and safe storage.<br /> <br /> • A growing body of research suggests household water treatment and safe storage (HWTS):a. dramatically improves microbial water quality; b. significantly reduces diarrhoea; c. is among the most effective of water, sanitation and health interventions; d. is highly cost-effective; and e. can be rapidly deployed and taken up by vulnerable populations.<br /> <br /> • Existing low-cost technologies for safe drinking water are: a. Chlorination – adding chlorine in liquid or tablet form to drinking water stored in a protected container; b. Solar disinfection – exposing water in disposable clear plastic bottles to sunlight for a day, typically on the roof of a house; c. Filtration; d. Combined flocculation /disinfection systems–adding powders or tablets to coagulate and flocculate sediments in water followed by a timed release of disinfectant; e. boiling; f. Safe storage<br /> <br /> • Many low-cost HWTS technologies do not come with clear labels and reliable accreditations attesting to their ability to provide “safe” water. This has led to uncertainty and confusion among consumers and other stakeholders.<br /> <br /> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">According to the [inside]11th Five Year Plan[/inside]</span><br /> <a href="http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">http://planningcommission.gov.in/plans/planrel/fiveyr/11th/11_v2/11v2_ch5.pdf</span></a>:</p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> The status of provision of water and sanitation has improved slowly. According to Census 1991, 55.54% of the rural population had access to an improved water source. As on 1 April 2007, the Department of Drinking Water Supply’s figures show that out of a total of 1,50,7349 rural habitations in the country, 74.39% (11,21,366 habitations) are fully covered and 14.64% (2,20,165 habitations) are partially covered. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> Present estimates shows that out of the 2.17 lakh water quality affected habitation as on 1.4.05, about 70,000 habitations have since been addressed for providing safe drinking water.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> The access to toilets is even poorer. As per the latest Census data (2001), only 36.4% of the total population has latrines within or attached to their houses. However in rural areas, only 21.9% of population has latrines within or attached to their houses. An estimate based on the number of individual household toilets constructed under the TSC programme (a demand-driven programme implemented since 1999) puts the sanitation coverage in the country at about 49% (as on November 2007). </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> An evaluation study on the programme conducted in 2002 shows 80% of toilets constructed were put to use. This use is expected to be much higher as awareness has improved much since 2002.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> The GoI’s major intervention in water sector started in 1972–73 through Accelerated Rural Water Supply Programme (ARWSP) for assisting States/Uts to accelerate the coverage of drinking water supply. In 1986, the entire programme was given a mission approach with the launch of the Technology Mission on Drinking Water and Related Water Management. This Technology Mission was later renamed as Rajiv Gandhi National Drinking Water Mission (RGNDWM) in 1991–92. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> In 1999, Department of Drinking Water Supply (DDWS) was formed under the MoRD to give emphasis to rural water supply as well as on sanitation. In the same year, new initiatives in water sector had been initiated through Sector Reform Project, later it was scaled up as Swajaldhara in 2002. With sustained interventions, DDWS remains an important institution to support the States/UTs in serving the rural population with water and sanitation related services all across India.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> There are about 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations in the country with more than half of the habitations affected with excess iron (118088). This is followed by fluoride (31306), salinity (23495), nitrate (13958), arsenic (5029) in that order. There are about 25000 habitations affected with multiple problems. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 States. Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam. The hand pump attached de-fluoridation and iron removal plants have failed due to in appropriate technology unsuited to community perceptions and their involvement. Desalination plants have also met a similar fate due to lapses at various levels starting with planning to post implementation maintenance.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> To ‘provide clean drinking water for all by 2009 and ensure that there are no slip-backs by the end of the Eleventh Plan’ is one of the monitorable targets of the Eleventh Five Year Plan. The first part of the goal coincides with the terminal year of Bharat Nirman Programme under which it is proposed to provide safe drinking water to all habitations. Under the Bharat Nirman Programme 55,067 not covered habitations, 2.8 lakh slipped back habitations, and 2.17 lakh quality-affected habitations are proposed to be covered.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium">**page**</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"> </span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:medium"><em>According to the Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Links to Health FACTS AND FIGURES *updated November 2004:</em> </span></span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><br /> <span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• 1.8 million people die every year from diarrhoeal diseases (including cholera); 90% are children under 5, mostly in developing countries. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• 88% of diarrhoeal disease is attributed to unsafe water supply, inadequate sanitation and hygiene. Improved water supply reduces diarrhoea morbidity by between 6% to 25%, if severe outcomes are included. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Improved sanitation reduces diarrhoea morbidity by 32%. Hygiene interventions including hygiene education and promotion of hand washing can lead to a reduction of diarrhoeal cases by up to 45%. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Improvements in drinking-water quality through household water treatment, such as chlorination at point of use, can lead to a reduction of diarrhoea episodes by between 35% and 39%.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• 1.3 million people die of malaria each year, 90% of whom are children under 5. There are 396 million episodes of malaria every year, most of the disease burden is in Africa south of the Sahara. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Intensified irrigation, dams and other water related projects contribute importantly to this disease burden. Better management of water resources reduces transmission of malaria and other vector-borne diseases.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world’s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Between 2002 and 2015, the world ís population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In 2002, 1.1 billion people lacked access to improved water sources, which represented 17% of the global population. Over half of the world’s population has access to improved water through household connections or yard tap. Of the 1.1 billion without improved water sources, nearly two third live in Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, 42% of the population is still without improved water. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• In order to meet the water supply MDG target, an additional 260 000 people per day up to 2015 should gain access to improved water sources. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Between 2002 and 2015, the world’s population is expected to increase every year by 74.8 million people.</span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• The development of water resources continues in an accelerated pace to meet the food, fibre and energy needs of a world population of 8 billion by 2025. </span></p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-left:0in; margin-right:0in; text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">• Lack of capacity for health impact assessment transfers hidden costs to the health sector and increases the disease burden on local communities. Environmental management approaches for health need to be incorporated into strategies for integrated water resources management.</span></p> ', 'credit_writer' => '', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 12, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'water-and-sanitation-55', 'meta_title' => '', 'meta_keywords' => '', 'meta_description' => '', 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 55, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 25 $metaTitle = 'Environment | Water and Sanitation' $metaKeywords = '' $metaDesc = 'KEY TRENDS • According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural...' $disp = '<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">KEY TRENDS</span></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water <strong>*12</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd) and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 <strong>*11</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) <strong>*10</strong><br /><br />• Sanitation coverage as on 24th May, 2018 in rural areas of Bihar was 55.84 percent, Assam was 85.83 percent, Goa was 76.22 percent, Jammu & Kashmir was 81.52 percent, Jharkhand was 76.99 percent, Karnataka was 87.89 percent, Madhya Pradesh was 88.05 percent, Manipur was 83.56 percent, Nagaland was 91.73 percent, Odisha was 55.0 percent, Puducherry was 63.06 percent, Tamil Nadu was 98.72 percent, Uttar Pradesh was 68.83 percent, Tripura was 74.77 percent, Telangana was 84.13 percent and West Bengal was 93.48 percent <strong>*10</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify">• Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose <strong>*9</strong><br /><br />• While access and coverage of latrine facilities is as high as 95 percent in Kerala, 91 percent in Mizoram and 89 percent in Manipur, less than 25 percent of households have access to latrine facilities within the household premises in Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• As per Census 2011, Bihar (77), Chhattisgarh (75), Jharkhand (78) and Odisha (78) are states with more than 75 percent households having no latrine facilities at all <strong>*8</strong><br /><br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved drinking water source for 534 million people. Still there are 92 million people in India without access to an improved drinking water source in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Between 1990 and 2012, India increased access to improved sanitation for 291 million people. Still there are 792 million people in India without access to an improved sanitation facility in 2012 <strong>*7</strong><br /> <br />• Among rural households, 85.8 percent had sufficient drinking water and for urban India the corresponding figure was 89.6 percent. 59.4 percent and 8.8 percent households in rural India and urban India respectively had no latrine facilities <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• The percentage of households who got drinking water facilities within premises was 46.1 percent in rural India and 76.8 percent in urban India. About 62.3 percent of rural households and 16.7 percent of urban households did not have any bathroom facility <strong>*6</strong><br /> <br />• India accounts for 59 per cent of the 1.1 billion people in the world who practice open defecation <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• India has 97 million people without access to improved sources of drinking water, second only to China <strong>*5</strong><br /> <br />• According to a report by Water Aid (2011), the population in India without access to water is 147.3 million <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Indian Government spent 0.57 percent of GDP on water and sanitation in 2008, which fell to 0.54 percent in 2009 and further to 0.45 percent in 2010 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• India provided over 200 million people with access to sanitation between 1995 and 2008 <strong>*4</strong><br /> <br />• Some 1.6 million children die each year from diarrhea and other gastrointestinal diseases for which contaminated drinking water is a leading cause <strong>*3</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 65 per cent of rural households had no latrine facility <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• Nearly 18 per cent of rural households had all three facilities (drinking water within premises, latrine and electricity) <strong>*2</strong><br /> <br />• About 66 million population is at risk due to excess fluoride in 200 districts of 17 states <strong>*1</strong><br /> <br />• Arsenic contamination is widespread in West Bengal and it is now seen in Bihar, eastern UP, and Assam <strong>*1</strong></p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>12.</strong> NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Press%20Note%20NSS%20Report%20No.%20584%20Drinking%20Water,%20Sanitation,%20Hygiene%20and%20Housing%20Condition%20in%20India%20NSS%2076th%20Round%20July%20to%20December%202018%20released%20on%2023rd%20November%202019.pdf" title="Press Note NSS Report No. 584 Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India NSS 76th Round July to December 2018 released on 23rd November 2019">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>11.</strong> CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation.pdf" title="Report_No_15_of_2018_-_Performance_Audit_on_National_Rural_Drinking_Water_Programme_in_Ministry_of_Drinking_Water_and_Sanitation">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>10. </strong>51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/51st%20Report%20of%20Standing%20Committee%20on%20Rural%20Development%20SBM%20Gramin.pdf" title="51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development SBM Gramin">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>9.</strong> Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Swachhta_%20Status_Report2016.pdf" title="Swachhta Status Report 2016">click here</a> to access)</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>8.</strong> Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (<a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol1.pdf">Volume 1</a> , <a href="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf" title="http://indiabudget.nic.in/es2015-16/echapter-vol2.pdf">Volume 2</a>) </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>7.</strong> Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please <a href="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation" title="https://im4change.in/siteadmin/tinymce/uploaded/Progress%20on%20drinking%20water%20and%20sanitation.pdf" title="Progress on drinking water and sanitation">click here</a> to download</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><div style="text-align:justify"><strong>6.</strong> Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (<a href="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html" title="https://im4change.org/latest-news-updates/key-indicators-of-drinking-water-sanitation-hygiene-and-housing-condition-in-india-23742.html">click here</a> to read more) </div><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>5. </strong>WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please <a href="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf" title="http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2012/jmp2012.pdf">click here</a> to access</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>4.</strong> Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please <a href="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf" title="http://www.globalfactcheck.org/documents/2011%20WaterAid%20report%20confuses%20MDGs%20with%20Millennium%20Declaration%20off%20track%20off%20target%20report%20WaterAid%20america.pdf">click here</a> to access </p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>3.</strong> Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>2.</strong> Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey</p><p style="text-align:justify"> </p><p style="text-align:justify"><strong>1.</strong> 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India</p><div style="text-align:justify"> </div><p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:medium">' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'
include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
![]() |
Water and Sanitation |
KEY TRENDS
• According to NSS 76th Round, the major source of drinking water of the household was hand pump in the rural areas and piped water into dwelling in the urban areas. About 42.9 percent of the households in the rural areas used hand pump as the principal source of drinking water and about 40.9 percent of the households in the urban areas used piped water into dwelling as the principal source of drinking water *12
• As of December 2017, only 44 percent of rural habitations and 85 percent of Government schools and anganwadis could be provided access to safe drinking water, only 18 percent of rural population were provided potable drinking water by piped water supply and only 17 percent of rural households were provided household connections. The overall coverage of rural habitations increased only by 8 percent at 40 litre per capita per day (lpcd) and 5.5 percent at 55 lpcd after incurring expenditure of Rs. 81,168 crore during the period 2012-17 *11
• As on 24th May, 2018, nearly 60.83 percent of total villages (viz. 6,02,912) in the country were ODF. The proportion of villages, which were found to be ODF, is the lowest in Goa and Lakshadweep (both zero percent), followed by Tripura (2.21 percent), Bihar (12.15 percent), Odisha (20.42 percent) and Uttar Pradesh (24.65 percent) *10
• Out of the 3,788 villages surveyed by NSSO, 13.1 percent villages in India were found to have community toilets. Out of the sample villages, at the national level, 1.7 percent villages were found to be having the community toilets but not using them. 82.1 percent of all the community toilets available in the villages were being used for defecation or washing purpose *9
12. NSS Report No. 584: Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 76th Round, July 2018 to December 2018 (released on 23rd November 2019), please click here to access
11. CAG's Report No.15 of 2018 - Performance Audit on National Rural Drinking Water Programme in the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, please click here to access
10. 51st Report of Standing Committee on Rural Development related to the status of Swachh Bharat Mission-Gramin in various states (published in July, 2018), please click here to access
9. Swachhta Status Report 2016, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, (please click here to access)
8. Economic Survey 2015-16, Ministry of Finance (Volume 1 , Volume 2)
7. Progress on drinking water and sanitation, Joint Monitoring Programme update 2014 (released in May 2014), please click here to download 6. Key Indicators of Drinking Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Housing Condition in India, NSS 69th round, July 2012 to December 2012 (click here to read more)
5. WHO/ UNICEF Joint monitoring report 2012: Progress on drinking water and sanitation, please click here to access
4. Off-track, off-target-Why investment in water, sanitation and hygiene is not reaching those who need it most (2011), Water Aid, please click here to access
3. Providing Safe Water: Evidence from Randomized Evaluations by Amrita Ahuja, Michael Kremer and Alix Peterson Zwane, April, 2010
2. Housing Condition and Amenities in India, 2008-09, National Sample Survey
1. 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, Government of India
|