Congratulations!

Source: Department for International Development (2009). Factsheet – Water and Sanitation. UK

The diagram shows that the population in African and Asian regions have no access to improved sanitation.

Improved sanitation usually means passing through a hierarchy of pit latrines, with pour flush latrines and septic tank latrines the plausible options. In urban areas the picture is more mixed. For high-density urban areas sewerage systems have obvious advantages.

Source: UNDP (2006). Human Development Report 2006, p. 113. NY

School pit latrines (Zambia, June 2009) Source: Torsten Krekeler (BGR)	School vault latrines (Namibia, June 2008) Source: Torsten Krekeler (BGR)

Congratulations!

According to Population Action International, based upon the UN medium population projections of 1998, more than 2.8 billion people in 48 countries will face water stress or water scarcity conditions by 2025. An area is experiencing water stress when annual water supplies drop below 1700 m3 per person. Water scarcity means that the annual water supply is below 1000 m3 per person. This graphic shows which African nations are expected to be experiencing water stress, and which are expected to be facing water scarcity, by the year 2025. It also includes a graphic which shows that as the world's population continues to grow, a higher proportion of the population will be affected by water stress and water scarcity.

Source: http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/freshwater_stress_and_scarcity_in_africa_by_2025

Congratulations!

Source: UNDP (2006): Human Development Report 2006, p. 62. NY

It is difficult to capture real public spending on water and sanitation partly because of the fragmentation of financing across ministries, partly because of decentralization and partly because donor financing is often off-budget. However, public spending in the sector as a whole typically represents less than 0.5% of GDP, falling to 0.1% in Pakistan and Zambia (see figure). Within the sector expenditure on sanitation typically falls well short of that for water. Sanitation investment averages about 12%-15% of the total in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. Overall spending is low not just relative to national income, but also to other areas of social spending, such as public health. When measured against military spending, the gulf widens to very large proportions. For example, India spends 8 times more of its national wealth on military budgets than on water and sanitation. Pakistan spends 47 times more. In sub-Saharan Africa low average incomes clearly constrain public spending capacity.

Source: UNDP (2006): Human Development Report 2006, p. 62. NY

Congratulations!

The overall public and private investment needs for improved water supply and sanitation and water resources management are considerable. However, at the country level, meeting such investment challenges is highly feasible and within the reach of most nations.

• Global estimates indicate that an additional annual investment of USD 11.3 billion is required to meet the MDG on water supply and sanitation. But, the total accrued economic benefits of reaching the MDG is USD 84 billion – a seven-fold return.
  For example, the health-sector related costs avoided reach USD 7.3 billion a year, and the annual global value of adult working days gained as a result of less illness would be almost USD 750 million per year. The biggest value is found in the he total convenience time saving for water collection due to better access, which amounts to USD 64 billion. However the combination of improved water supply, sanitation and hygiene indicates the biggest economic impact.
• Economic benefits ranging from USD 3 to USD 34 per USD 1 invested (depending on the region and technologies applied) would be gained in the health, individual and household, and agricultural and industrial sectors if the water and sanitation MDG targets are achieved. The results confirm that the benefits far outweigh the costs.

Source: Stockholm International Water Institute, SIWI (2004-2005): "Making Water a Part of Economic Development: The Economic Benefits of Improved Water Management and Services". Stockholm. Sweden

Congratulations!

Source: http://www.uis.unesco.org/template/pdf/S&T/BulletinNo1EN.pdf

The figure shows that most expenditure of R&D still takes place within the main OECD regions (with the United States the major location for foreign R&D). Developing countries are increasingly attracting R&D centres, however, although R&D investments remain relatively small from a global perspective. In summary:

• Throughout the decade, North America has been the leading spender on R&D, both in 1990 with 38.2% as well as in 2000 with 37.2 %, spending US$ PPP 202 billion on R&D of the total world expenditure. The decline between the years depends on the general reducing United States' world share of Science & Technology (S&T) output indicators such as the number of publications in the Science Citation Index (SCI), which fell from 37.3% in 1990 to 33.2% in 2000.
• Asia follows North America, which invests 30.5% of world R&D expenditure. Countries in the Asian region could double their R&D investments from 1990-2000 (from US$ PPP 94.2 billion in 1990 to 235.6 billion in 2000), mainly due to growing expenditure in China.
• Europe has the third highest level of R&D investment, with expenditure of US$ PPP 202.9 billion. Its share of global investment declined more than that of North America, from 33.9% in 1990 to 27.2% in 2000. More than half of this decrease can be attributed to falling investment levels in Eastern Europe, which by 2000 represented only 3% of the total expenditure on R&D. In absolute terms, however, European investments increased by almost 50% over the decade (from US$ 138.8 billion in 1990 to 202.9 billion in 2000). This increase was led by the growth of expenditure in the European Union (EU) countries. In 2000, the EU was responsible for 86.1% of European expenditure. At the same time, Europe's research intensity remained stable over the decade, at approximately the 1.7% value.
• The diagram clearly shows that both sub-Saharan African countries and the Arab states have much lower levels of expenditure - only 1% in 1990 and 2000. South Africa accounted for 62% of the estimated total expenditure in Africa in 2000, spending 0.8% of its GDP on R&D and contributing significantly to fluctuations of regional figures over the decade.

Source: UIS Bulletin on Science and Technology Statistics, (2004): Issue No. 1, April 2004. A Decade of Investment in Research and Development (R&D): 1990-2000