Simplifying the Water Poverty Index

Cho, Danny I.; Ogwang, Tomson; Opio, Christopher

doi:10.1007/s11205-009-9501-2

Cited by 49 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(7 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The lack of access to sustained safe water leads to a decrease in productivity, which in turn results in the poverty of that society (Komnenic et al, 2009;Cho et al, 2010). This in turn leads to a high dependency ratio within the municipality, which directly hampers the ability of the population to save and/or engage in other entrepreneurial activities (ELM, 2010).…”

Section: Demarcationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This motivated Sullivan et al (2002) to design the WPI as an alternative water situation assessment tool. The WPI has the following advantages over conventional methods (Komnenic et al, 2009;Sullivan & Meigh, 2007, Cho et al, 2010:…”

Section: The Water Poverty Indexmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These five components are contained in the Water Poverty Index (WPI) as developed by Sullivan et al (2002), and refined by researchers at the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology in Wallingford, United Kingdom. The WPI aims to target political and financial attention towards those most in need, and therefore a need has arisen for more cost effective ways of calculating the WPI without much loss of information (Cho, Ogwang & Opio, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Comparison of the Traditional and Simplified Methods for Water Poverty Index Calculation

Vyver

2013

MJSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Demarcationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Water Poverty Indexmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of the Traditional and Simplified Methods for Water Poverty Index Calculation

Vyver

2013

MJSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Taking into consideration the current state of the art of the approaches followed to analyse HRWS, three aspects emerge as critical issues when assessing levels of WASH services from a rights perspective: i) how to measure each dimension of both rights in the field (see Flores et al 2013), ii) how to assess the relative importance of each dimension when combining them, while ensuring that the methodologies are flexible enough to be contextually relevant, which is especially critical in the case of human rights as the mandate holder highlights (United Nations 2012), and iii) how to use adequate procedures to construct a composite indicator (Cho et al 2010;Flores et al 2013;Giné Garriga and Pérez-Foguet 2010;Hajkowicz 2006;OECD-JRC 2008). This manuscript aims to address these challenges.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of the Human Rights to Water and Sanitation Normative Content in Measuring the Level of Service

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human Rights to Water and Sanitation (HRWS) have been consolidated as relevant frameworks to measure different levels of services. It is essential to move forward with specific initiatives that interpret the content of these human rights and operationalize them through specific metrics. However, some critical issues emerge in attempting this. Different approaches are proposed in this article to tackle this challenge: i) utilizing a participatory technique to discuss the relative importance of the normative criteria to define water and sanitation services, ii) defining a short list of key indicators to measure the different dimensions of HRWS, and iii) assessing the impact of different weighting systems in the constructing an aggregated index, which has been proposed as a useful tool to monitor water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) from a rights perspective. Two municipalities (in Mozambique and Nicaragua) were selected as initial case studies. The results suggest that there is a common understanding among the experts about prioritization of the HRWS criteria. Differences in the relative importance given to the HRWS criteria can be explained due to the particularities of the local context. Further, the research suggests that expert opinions may be partially conditioned by targets and indicators proposed at the international level. Although the influence of weighting techniques on aggregated measures and their utilization in the decision-making process are limited, this methodology has a great potential for adapting specific WASH metrics to different regional, national, and/or local contexts taking into account the HRWS normative content.

show abstract

“…It has been applied at various scales: national (Lawrence et al 2002;Komnenic et al 2009;Cho et al 2010), river basin (Pérez-Foguet and Giné Garriga 2008;Manandhar et al 2012;Pandey et al 2012), regional/district/sub-district (Heidecke 2006;Manandhar et al 2012) and local (Sullivan et al 2003;Cullis and O'Regan 2004;Giné Garriga and Pérez-Foguet 2011;Sullivan and Meigh, 2007;Manandhar et al 2012). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Water Poverty to Water Prosperity—A More Participatory Approach to Studying Local Water Resources Management

Wilk

Jönsson

2013

Water Resour Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Water Poverty Index (WPI), a tool designed for integrated analysis of water issues, was set-up in a community in Madhya Pradesh, India through a transparent and participatory process. Though the aim of the WPI is to primarily use existing statistical data, quantitative information from census and local records was combined with qualitative data from community interviews and participatory exercises. The inclusion of community chosen indicators and the adjustment of values so that higher numbers represent water prosperity rather than water poverty, led to the Water Prosperity Index (WPI + ). The WPI + score was contrasted with the WPI at community level. It was also calculated for two community areas with different caste and socioeconomic characteristics and weighted separately according to water issues prioritized by men and women. The WPI + revealed a great difference in water access between the two areas and in prioritized issues between men and women illustrated in the importance of appropriate spatial representation and gender sensitive assessment for revealing important disparities. Results also showed that highly aggregated data hide these differences making it more difficult to target the most vulnerable groups when planning measures to increase equitable water allocation. While quantitative data revealed an important perspective of the water situation, qualitative data about adequacy of resources, services or institutions, improved understanding of which issues to prioritize. A valid and useful community water index must be based on representative participation, transparency and local influence on the methodology and subsequent results.2

show abstract

Simplifying the Water Poverty Index

Abstract: Water poverty index, Principal component analysis, Basic needs, Millennium development goals,

Cited by 49 publications

References 17 publications

A Comparison of the Traditional and Simplified Methods for Water Poverty Index Calculation

A Comparison of the Traditional and Simplified Methods for Water Poverty Index Calculation

The Influence of the Human Rights to Water and Sanitation Normative Content in Measuring the Level of Service

From Water Poverty to Water Prosperity—A More Participatory Approach to Studying Local Water Resources Management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About