Safer Water for All: WHO Highlights Unequal Progress in Small-Scale Rural Systems – Devdiscourse

Report on Small-Scale Water and Sanitation Systems in Rural Europe: An SDG Perspective

A 2025 World Health Organization (WHO) report, titled Small-Scale Sanitation and Drinking-Water Supply Systems: Driving Country Action Towards Safer Services, provides a critical assessment of water and sanitation services in rural Europe. Prepared in collaboration with key partners under the Protocol on Water and Health, the report evaluates progress towards Sustainable Development Goal 6 (SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation), highlighting significant challenges that also impact SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). The findings underscore that nearly one-fifth of the region’s population relies on small-scale systems that are frequently under-resourced, inadequately monitored, and unsafe.

Persistent Disparities: A Challenge to SDG 6 and SDG 10

The report identifies a stark rural-urban divide in access to safe water and sanitation, which directly impedes the achievement of SDG 6 targets and exacerbates inequalities contrary to the principles of SDG 10. While regional progress has been made, rural populations remain significantly disadvantaged.

• Access to Drinking Water: In 2024, 85% of rural residents had access to safely managed drinking water, compared to 95% of urban residents.
• Access to Sanitation: Only 72% of the rural population utilized safely managed sanitation services, in contrast to 83% in urban areas.
• Health Risks: The disparity poses a direct threat to SDG 3. Microbial contamination, particularly from Escherichia coli, was found in up to 33% of rural water samples, compared to a maximum of 4% in urban systems. Chemical pollutants like arsenic, lead, and nitrates are also more prevalent in rural supplies.

National Initiatives and Uneven Progress Towards SDG Targets

Analysis of 35 countries reveals varied efforts to strengthen small-scale systems and advance SDG 6. However, progress is inconsistent, with a notable imbalance between water and sanitation initiatives. Forty-one distinct actions targeted drinking water safety, while only eight focused on sanitation.

Key Country-Level Actions

• Risk-Based Management: Many nations have adopted WHO’s Water Safety Plans (WSPs) to proactively manage risks. Hungary and the United Kingdom have made such risk assessments mandatory.
• System Monitoring: Estonia and Croatia have developed national inventories of wells and small-scale supplies to improve oversight.
• Infrastructure and Transparency: Germany has enhanced consumer transparency through annual reporting, while Azerbaijan has invested in decentralized wastewater treatment infrastructure, contributing to SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure).

Despite these actions, critical areas such as legal reform, sustainable financing, and comprehensive data management show limited advancement, hindering long-term progress towards the SDGs.

Systemic Barriers Impeding SDG Attainment

The report outlines several entrenched obstacles that prevent the full realization of water and sanitation goals for rural communities.

1. Financial Constraints: Funding for small-scale infrastructure is scarce, with governments often prioritizing large urban projects. This lack of investment is a key barrier to achieving SDG 6 and SDG 9.
2. Governance and Institutional Weaknesses: Responsibilities are fragmented across multiple agencies, leading to gaps in accountability and oversight. Weak coordination between health and environment sectors, crucial for an integrated approach, perpetuates inefficiency.
3. Capacity and Data Deficiencies: Local operators often lack the necessary training and awareness of support mechanisms. A significant scarcity of data, especially on on-site sanitation systems like septic tanks, makes effective monitoring and investment planning for SDG targets impossible.
4. Political Neglect: A lack of sustained political will leaves rural services vulnerable, a fragility highlighted by service disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Strategic Recommendations for Accelerating Progress on Water and Sanitation Goals

To build momentum and ensure no one is left behind, the report urges countries to adopt an integrated and strategic approach, leveraging partnerships as envisioned in SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

Key Recommendations

• Adopt an Integrated Approach: Treat sanitation and water as interlinked services by coordinating Water Safety Plans (WSPs) and Sanitation Safety Plans (SSPs). This enhances efficiency and reduces long-term costs.
• Strengthen Governance and Financing: Enact robust laws, clarify institutional responsibilities, and develop sustainable financing models to ensure the stability and resilience of rural systems.
• Enhance Data for Targeted Action: Create comprehensive registries for all small-scale systems and improve disaggregated data collection. A stronger evidence base is essential for guiding investments toward underserved communities.
• Foster Community Engagement and Capacity: Promote local ownership and provide practical training for operators to improve service quality and ensure the long-term success of reforms, contributing to SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

The report concludes that achieving equitable access to water and sanitation, as mandated by SDG 6, must begin with a focus on the smallest and most remote communities. The Protocol on Water and Health provides a critical framework for unifying sectors to deliver safe and sustainable services for all.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: This is the central theme of the article. It directly addresses the challenges of providing safe drinking water and sanitation, particularly in rural areas. The text focuses on access, safety, management, and the disparities in service provision for “Small-Scale Sanitation and Drinking-Water Supply Systems.”
• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article explicitly links water and sanitation to public health. It highlights health risks from “microbial contamination” (like E. coli) and “chemical pollutants such as arsenic, lead, nitrates, and fluoride,” which can cause illnesses and affect well-being. The “Protocol on Water and Health” is mentioned as a key framework.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The article emphasizes the “stark” “rural–urban disparities” in access to safe water and sanitation. It provides statistics showing that rural populations are significantly underserved compared to their urban counterparts, pointing to a clear inequality based on geographical location. The report’s message is to ensure “equitable access” and not leave “underserved communities” behind.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals: The article underscores the importance of collaboration. The report itself is a product of a partnership between the WHO, the German Environment Agency, and UNECE. It also mentions the “Protocol on Water and Health” as a “regional catalyst” that unites “health, environment, and water sectors under one regional vision” and fosters information exchange. The text also points to the need for better coordination between ministries and agencies to overcome “fragmented responsibilities.”

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 6.1: Achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all. The article directly addresses this by reporting that “85% of rural residents had access to safely managed drinking water compared with 95% in cities,” highlighting the gap in achieving universal and equitable access.
2. Target 6.2: Achieve access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all. This target is identified through the statistic that “only 72% of rural dwellers enjoyed safe sanitation against 83% of their urban counterparts.” The article also notes that sanitation efforts are “lagging” behind those for drinking water.
3. Target 6.3: Improve water quality by reducing pollution. The article discusses the failure to meet this target in many rural systems by citing issues of “microbial contamination, particularly from Escherichia coli” and the presence of “chemical pollutants such as arsenic, lead, nitrates, and fluoride.”
4. Target 6.b: Support and strengthen the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management. This is highlighted by the finding that “Community involvement has proven vital” and that when “municipalities and local authorities take ownership, service quality improves.”
5. Target 3.9: Substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination. The article implies this target by focusing on the health risks posed by contaminated water. The presence of E. coli and chemical pollutants is a direct threat to public health, and improving water safety is a primary way to reduce related illnesses.
6. Target 10.2: Empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… location. The article’s core focus on “rural-urban disparities” and ensuring that “underserved communities are not left behind” directly relates to this target of reducing inequality based on location.
7. Target 17.14: Enhance policy coherence for sustainable development. The article identifies a lack of policy coherence, describing “fragmented responsibilities across ministries and agencies” and “weak coordination between the health and environment sectors.” It calls for an “integrated approach, treating sanitation and water as interlinked services.”

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Proportion of population using safely managed drinking water services (Indicator 6.1.1): The article provides explicit data for this indicator, stating “85% of rural residents” and “95% in cities” have access.
2. Proportion of population using safely managed sanitation services (Indicator 6.2.1): The article provides explicit data for this indicator, citing “72% of rural dwellers” and “83% of their urban counterparts.”
3. Measures of ambient water quality: The article implies indicators for water quality by mentioning the percentage of water samples with “microbial contamination, particularly from Escherichia coli,” which ranged from “0.4% to 33% of samples in rural areas.” The frequency of “chemical pollutants such as arsenic, lead, nitrates, and fluoride” is also mentioned as a measure.
4. Implementation of risk-based management plans: The article implies this as an indicator of progress by mentioning the adoption of “Water Safety Plans (WSPs)” and “Sanitation Safety Plans (SSPs)” as key success factors. The number of countries making risk assessments mandatory is a measurable outcome.
5. Existence of national data registries: The article points to the creation of “national inventories of wells and small supplies” (e.g., in Estonia and Croatia) and the need for “disaggregated data collection” as crucial indicators for effective monitoring and investment planning.
6. Disparity in access to services between rural and urban populations: The statistical gap between rural and urban access rates for both water (10 percentage points) and sanitation (11 percentage points) serves as a direct indicator for measuring inequality (Target 10.2).

Summary Table

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators’ to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: devdiscourse.com