Mathur Ritika Passi

citizens, highlights broad challenges, and
in doing so, explores how and to what
extent SDG 6 converges with the national
priorities in these two fields, and thus, how
and to what extent it can be internalised.
Assessing Access to Water and
Sanitation in India
‘Access to drinking water’ has different
understandings in the global and national
spheres. The United Nations Children’s
Fund (UNICEF) and World Health
Organization (WHO) define improved
drinking water as “one that, by nature of its
construction or through active intervention,
is protected from outside contamination,
in particular from contamination with
faecal matter.” 5 Indian government policies
and programmes define ‘access to drinking
water’ differently. The National Rural
Drinking Water Programme (NRDWP)
defines access to drinking water as “full
coverage,” assigning 40 litres per capita per
day (lifeline supply) to be provided to all
households. 6 The broader target mentions
sustainable supply, convenient delivery
systems and water security at household
levels, but ignores the technical emphasis
on the quality of water supply, as in the
UNICEF-WHO definition. 7 However,
NRDWP does have a separate focus
category on habitations where water is
chemically contaminated (arsenic, fluoride,
iron, etc.).
The Programme Evaluation Organisation,
under the erstwhile Planning Commission
of India, in their survey inferred that
the definition set by the government for
providing water is extremely “liberal”
and lacks focus on supply quality. 8 As a
result, estimates of the households covered
under drinking water programmes are
understated—depriving households from
any further benefits or even attention from
the government or local administrative
bodies. Such underestimates, in turn,
mislead consequent policies, resource
allocation and sustainability of the goals. 9
Such variations in interpretations also
exist in the sanitation sector. The Nirmal
Bharat Programme (total sanitation for
all) under MDWS defines sanitation as “a
system that promotes appropriate disposal
of human wastes, proper use of toilets and
discourages open space defecation.” 10 This
definition has evolved from the earlier
understanding of simply providing access
to improved sanitation facilities within a
household. UNICEF-WHO define improved
sanitation as “flush or pour flush to piper
sewer system, septic tank, or pit latrines;
ventilates improved pit latrine; pit latrine
with slab; and/or composting toilet.” 11
The Indian policy documents mention
these different definitions, but it remains
ambiguous which definition is followed for
policy prescriptions.
Inconsistencies in defining the proposed
scope of operation under different water and
sanitation programmes and policies (both
global and national) undermine efforts to
arrive at a genuine and realistic estimate of
successes achieved.
The 68th Round of the National Sample
Survey (NSS) recorded an increase of 17.5%
between 1991 and 2012 in the provisioning
of safe drinking water. 12 But there still exists
a disparity between urban and rural areas.
As the NSS data reveals, more people in
urban areas have piped water connection
within their premises than in rural areas,
similar to global trends. While 90.5% urban
population had access to water in 1991, only
67.1% people could avail of this basic utility
in rural areas (Figure 1). The growth rate,
however, of providing safe drinking water
has been much higher in rural areas, with
the percentage of people without access to
safe drinking water decreasing from 32.9%
in 1991 to 11.5% in 2012. 13 As evident, the
MDG target of halving the people without
access to drinking water has been fulfilled,
but the struggle to provide access to drinking
water to all continues.
Sanitation, on the other hand, has witnessed
less laudable progress and has fallen short
of the MDG as well as the national target.
The urban-rural divide is also appreciably
higher. The NSS indicates that only 11.8%
rural and 65.3% urban residents had access
to sanitation facilities in 1993. According
to 2012 estimates, 54.9% of the total
population, including 89.6% in urban areas
and 38.8% in rural areas, gained improved
sanitation facilities (Figure 2). The rate of
progress in rural areas was nominally higher
than in urban areas. Despite numerous
initiatives, India still needs to provide
improved sanitation to 45% of its total
population.
47