Census Analytical Report - Uganda Bureau of Statistics

The 2002 Population and Housing CensusTable 8.6: Distribution of Households by Source of Drinking Water andResidence to Nearest Water Source*Selected Water IndicatorsResidenceUrban Rural TotalSource of Drinking WaterSafe Sources 93.0 56.6 60.9Tap/piped water 58.5 3.9 11.5Borehole 12.4 26.0 24.1Protected well/spring 20.7 22.7 22.5Gravity flow scheme 1.4 3.0 2.8Unsafe Sources 6.8 44.4 39.1Distance to Nearest Water SourceOn premises 21.6 3.3 5.8Less than 1 km 74.4 72.4 72.61 to less than 5 kms 3.7 19.3 17.15kms + 0.4 5.1 4.4* Category by column may not add to 100 due to rounding.Close to a third ofthe households didnot have a safetoilet facilitySafe disposal of human waste reduces disease transmission. The 2002 Censusfindings indicate that toilet coverage was not universal in Uganda. Nearly one third ofthe households did not have a toilet facility (14 percent were using an uncovered pitlatrine and 17 percent without a facility at all). This was in agreement with the UPPAPII findings that other forms of human waste disposal are used in places without toilets.One out of every 40 households in urban areas (2.4 percent) reported lack of toilets.Table 8.7: Percentage Distribution of Households with Toilet Facilities byResidenceToilet Facility Characteristics Urban Rural TotalType of FacilityCovered Pit Latrine 72.6 63.3 64.6VIP Latrine 9.8 2.3 3.4Flush Toilet 8.7 0.7 1.8Uncovered Pit Latrine 6.8 15.2 14.1No Toilet Facility 2.1 18.5 16.2Major Toilet FacilitiesWith a Safe Toilet 91.1 66.3 69.7Without a Safe Toilet 8.9 33.7 30.3Total 100 100 100Another aspect of sanitation is solid waste disposal. Table 8.8 shows that most of thehouseholds (40 percent) disposed of solid waste by simply throwing in the gardens.However, in so doing, there was no mechanism of isolating harmful solid waste fromthe rest of the solid waste. The widespread use of polythene bags and the haphazard88