CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE) | Mehta Lyla et al., 'Water for Food Security, Nutrition and Social Justice', , IFPRI, 2019

1. Introduction 2. Linking Water and Food Security and Nutrition (FSN) 3. Agricultural Water Management 4. Water Governance for FSN 5. Water, FSN and Social Justice Index | Non-PR | IFPRI5; CRP5; 1 Fostering Climate-Resilient and Sustainable Food Supply; G Cross-cutting gender theme | EPTD | CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE)

In many slums and informal settlements in the global South, the quality of water accessed by poor people is so bad that it adversely affects health and nutrition, especially of children and babies. Moreover, many of these settlements lack adequate sanitation, which contributes to disease, such as diarrhoea, which further contributes to poor nutritional outcomes. Safe drinking water and sanitation are fundamental to the nutrition, health and dignity of all. Despite the progress made in achieving global targets around water and sanitation, about 3 in 10 people, or 2.1 billion lack access to safe, readily available water at home, and 6 in 10, or 4.5 billion, lack safely managed sanitation. Growing water scarcity and variability will increase the competition for water resources across sectors, with water often being taken away from the agricultural sector to drive greater economic value per unit of water in other sectors. The chapter also presents an overview of the key concepts discussed in this book.

We investigate the impacts of access to piped water on drinking water quality, sanitation, hygiene and health outcomes in marginalized rural households of north-western Bangladesh, using a quasi-experimental setup. A government organization – the Barindra Multipurpose Development Authority (BMDA) – established a piped water network to connect rural households with the deep ground water resources and improve their access to potable water. Using propensity score matching, the study compares a treatment and a control group of households to identify gains in water-sanitation, hygiene and health outcomes. In terms of water safety, we find no improvement in the quality of drinking water, measured by E. coli count per 100 ml of water at the point of use (i.e. the pots and jars used to store it). Food utensils tested positive for E. coli in both the control and treatment group, thus showing no improvement through the BMDA intervention. Hygiene behavior such as handwashing with soap after defecation or before feeding children also does not improve. Finally, we do not find evidence of health benefits, such as decreased diarrhea incidence of under-five children or improved nutritional outcomes such as stunting, underweight and wasting. Although access to BMDA piped water in the premises is subject to a fee, it seems this incentive mechanism is not strong enough to improve water behavior or its outcomes: treated households are as poor as the non-treated in terms of maintaining hygiene and water quality, possibly because of lack of information.

CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE) | High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE), 'Water for food security and nutrition A report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security', , IFPRI, 2015

PR | IFPRI5;CRP5 | EPTD | CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems (WLE)

This chapter focuses on the multiple facets and meanings of water and how it is a contested resource. It also explores linkages between SDG 6 (Clean water and sanitation) and SDG 2 (Zero hunger). Water is essential for all life and integral to the functioning of food systems; similarly, changes in our food systems are essential to achieve SDG 6. And improvements in both are needed to reduce inequities in resources and achievements. As an example, land, food and water rights often go hand in hand, and are marked by gender, caste, racial and other exclusions. The chapter highlights how accessing water for food security can be challenging for smallholders and for vulnerable and marginalized women and men, and how water allocation systems, privatization and reform processes can affect local people’s rights to water, land and food. It argues for the need to improve policy coherence across water, land and food, and concludes by making a case for strengthening the relationship between the human right to water and food, especially for marginalized women and men.

Civil conflict began in Ethiopia in November 2020 and has reportedly caused major disrup tions in access to health services, food, and related critical services, in addition to the direct impacts of the conflict on health and well-being. However, the population-level impacts of the conflict have not yet been systematically quantified. We analyze high frequency phone surveys conducted by the World Bank, which included measures of access to basic ser vices, to estimate the impact of the first phase of the war (November 2020 to May 2021) on households in Tigray. After controlling for sample selection, a difference-in-differences approach is used to estimate causal effects of the conflict on population access to health services, food, and water and sanitation. Inverse probability weighting is used to adjust for sample attrition. The conflict has increased the share of respondents who report that they were unable to access needed health services by 35 percentage points (95% CI: 14–55 pp) and medicine by 8 pp (95% CI:2–15 pp). It has also increased the share of households unable to purchase staple foods by 26 pp (95% CI:7–45 pp). The share of households unable to access water did not increase, although the percentage able to purchase soap declined by 17 pp (95% CI: 1–32 pp). We document significant heterogeneity across popula tion groups, with disproportionate effects on the poor, on rural populations, on households with undernourished children, and those living in communities without health facilities. These significant disruptions in access to basic services likely underestimate the true bur den of conflict in the affected population, given that the conflict has continued beyond the survey period, and that worse-affected households may have higher rates of non-response. Documented spatial and household-level heterogeneity in the impact of the conflict may help guide rapid post-conflict responses.