3 DFID'S RESPONSE TO URBAN
POVERTY
59. Having explored the context of urbanisation within
international development more widely, we will now address DFID's
own portfolio of urban development programmes and policies. We
will start by looking at the geographical distribution of DFID's
support, followed by analysis of DFID support to international
programmes and initiatives such as the Community-Led Infrastructure
Finance Facility. We will also explore DFID's support to basic
services such as health, education, sanitation and water in urban
contexts. Much of DFID's support for urban development is channelled
through multilateral institutions and frameworks; these will be
assessed separately in Chapter 4.
Current programmes and projects
ASIA
60. The majority of DFID's slum upgrading and urban
development work is in South Asia. DFID is the largest bilateral
donor in the urban sector in India, where 24% of the population
in the largest cities lives in slums, with the potential for more
slum growth if cities are not well managed.[116]
Following around 20 years of involvement with the urban sector
in India, current and planned DFID programmes total £236
million.[117] The Department's
programmes focus on the provision of basic urban services and
on municipal capacity building, and include: ongoing urban development
programmes in Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal; a programme of policy
support to the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission,
a massive city modernisation scheme launched by the Government
of India; and an urban reform programme in Bihar (currently in
design phase).[118]
61. In Bangladesh the UK is providing £60 million
over six years to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
and UN-Habitat to support slum improvements in 34 towns and cities,
with benefits projected to reach some three million people.[119]
The project supports the establishment of local community development
committees which help to design urban infrastructure (for instance,
pit latrines, water supply and paved roads). This initiative was
praised in evidence as a means to ensure that urban development
is demand-driven and demonstrates a smaller-scale approach which
governments can then take up and expand.[120]
62. A number of other DFID country programmes in
Asia also include support to urban projects. For example, the
Department has recently funded an urban governance project in
Pakistan, the Faisalabad Devolution Project (£6.14 million
for the period 2004-08). In addition, projects that may not be
classified as urban development by DFID do, in practice, address
urban poverty. For example, the Indonesian Government told us
how the DFID-supported "Civil Society Initiatives Against
Poverty" project in Surabaya (2007-08) had increased the
accessibility of government-sponsored health services for the
urban poor, in particular street children.[121]
AFRICA
63. DFID has far less of an urban focus in Africa,
despite the fact that the continent has the highest proportion
of slum dwellers (62% of the urban population).[122]
One World Action told us that the Luanda Urban Poverty Programme
in Angola was for many years one of only two urban programmes
supported by DFID in Africa.[123]
We found this lack of focus concerning, especially once we had
witnessed the overcrowded conditions in Lagos during our visit
to Nigeria. Lagos's current population of 19 million is expected
to grow to 25 million by 2015. Given the appalling state of much
of the infrastructure in Lagos, especially transport, housing,
water and sanitation provision, we found it difficult to imagine
how the city would cope with population growth on this scale.
Many other African cities, including Kinshasa, Addis Ababa, Nairobi
and Dakar, are experiencing high levels of urban population growth.
64. We saw a number of examples of DFID support to
urban development during our visit to Nigeria, including: improvements
to the Lagos State Land Registry (see Chapter 2); the establishment
of the Enhancing Financial Innovation and Access for the Poor
programme; and HIV/AIDS and community regeneration projects. Again,
DFID does not always label projects that do, in fact, benefit
the urban poor as "urban development". As the DFID Minister
told us, urbanisation forms part of the context for many of the
issues on which DFID works: he said that the Department is "already
tackling some of the challenges of urbanisation that come in the
context of what we are already doing in health, education and
economic growth, et cetera."[124]
Most DFID country programmes within Africa support initiatives
for sustainable development, poverty reduction, governance, economic
growth and the achievement of the MDGs that include some urban
elements. However, DFID was not able to give us a coherent picture
of these programmes in the evidence it submitted to our inquiry
so we have been unable to assess individual country initiatives
on urban development within African contexts.
65. Witnesses told us that there is significant scope
for DFID to expand its support to urban development in Africa.
For example, the International Housing Coalition praised DFID's
work in India for putting slums and urban development "at
the centre of its programming." But it went on to say that:
DFID's urban programming outside of India is
limited and, where present, restricted mainly to the water and
sanitation sectors. While these are important priorities, the
billion people living in poor housing in urban areas across the
developing world would benefit from an expansion of this assistance.[125]
66. We were surprised at what appears to be a
sharp imbalance in the level and profile of DFID engagement in
programmes addressing urban development in Asia compared to Africa.
We understand that programmes that benefit urban contexts may
not always be labelled as such. But given the impressive range
of programmes explicitly labelled as "urban" in India,
we fail to understand why DFID does not support similar initiatives
in Africa—especially given its status as the world's fastest
urbanising region and the fact that it has the highest proportion
of slum dwellers. We are concerned that, without a new and comprehensive
approach to urban development in Africa, a number of cities could
face a humanitarian crisis in as little as five years' time, given
the huge expansion of their urban populations. We will return
to this issue in Chapter 5.
The Community-Led Infrastructure
Finance Facility (CLIFF)
67. CLIFF is an international partnership set up
in 2002 to provide finance to community projects and local urban
poor funds for housing and infrastructure projects. DFID provided
initial funding of £6.8 million.[126]
The Swedish international development agency, SIDA, provided £3
million. In July 2009, DFID announced a second phase of support
for CLIFF worth a further £15 million of support over five
years (to 2014). DFID told us that this decision followed a "favourable
evaluation earlier this year of the progress made in the first
phase, which has recently been completed."[127]
CLIFF is currently operational in India, Kenya and the Philippines.
DFID said that the second phase of funding will facilitate the
expansion of the Facility into two further countries—it
did not specify which ones—and within India, to enable the
provision of improved housing and sanitation for over 450,000
slum dwellers.[128]
DFID had told us in evidence that "we are planning with partners
to build on [CLIFF's current operations], not only in Asia but,
increasingly, in Sub-Saharan Africa."[129]
68. Homeless International, the NGO that co-ordinates
donor funding for CLIFF, highlighted two of the initiative's particular
achievements during in its initial phase: the participation of
poor urban dwellers in housing and service provision; and the
joint engagement of donors (DFID and SIDA), intermediaries (Homeless
International and Cities Alliance) and local implementing partners.[130]
Larry English, Director of Homeless International, described CLIFF
as a "bridging" mechanism that can change the way organisations
of the urban poor are viewed by both government and banks, and
leverage finance for housing and services as a result of this
new relationship.[131]
69. DFID says that CLIFF has seen particularly strong
results within India, "securing tenure and providing decent
homes for over 5,400 families and access to sanitation for over
800,000 slum dwellers." The initiative is projected to leverage
£33 million from a combination of private and public sources.[132]
70. We were impressed with the Community-Led Infrastructure
Finance Facility (CLIFF), which is forging new relationships between
urban poor organisations, governments, donors and banks—and
leveraging considerable financial resources in the process. We
commend DFID's decision to provide a second phase of funding to
CLIFF, and recommend that DFID encourage other donors to support
this highly worthwhile initiative. We were pleased to hear that
the second phase of funding will facilitate the expansion of the
Facility into two further countries beyond the initial three (India,
Kenya and the Philippines). We recommend that at least one of
these countries, and if possible both, are located in sub-Saharan
Africa, where improved urban housing and infrastructure is urgently
needed.
DFID's support to basic services
in urban settings
71. Living in crowded and polluted urban areas means
that slum dwellers have specific needs in terms of provision of
basic services such as housing, health, education, sanitation,
water, transport and energy. This section will consider DFID's
support to each of these sectors.
HOUSING
72. Poor households often use their home as both
an asset and a source of income, for example, renting a room or
operating a small shop.[133]
Security of tenure, as discussed in Chapter 2, can incentivise
residents to invest in and improve their homes, safe in the knowledge
that they will not be evicted. However, lack of access to credit
and mortgage finance often means that poor people can only improve
their housing incrementally. The costs of improvements are increased
by difficulties in obtaining construction advice and affordable
materials.[134] It
is estimated that at least 70% of all new housing is built informally
and incrementally rather than as a result of new home construction.
The cost of a typical house in developing countries is on average
10 times average annual salaries (compared to 2.5 to 6 times in
developed countries).[135]
73. Making improvements to slum dwellings avoids
the upheaval and disruption associated with resettlement programmes.
The NGO Results UK said that housing microfinance schemes offer
a "proven and effective means" of providing small, flexible
loans to individuals to improve their homes or build new low-cost
housing.[136] Microfinance
lenders often accept forms of collateral and guarantees which
are more appropriate and achievable for slum dwellers than those
required by traditional mortgage lenders. Results UK said that
such schemes have proven to yield high repayment rates, making
microfinance a sustainable venture for investors. They advised
that DFID should work to strengthen existing microfinance institutions
and help to ensure that housing microfinance is available to the
very poor.[137]
74. Most of DFID's support to housing is channelled
through CLIFF and multilateral initiatives (which will be discussed
in Chapter 4). The NGO Habitat for Humanity told us that housing-focused
programmes comprised a "particularly small" percentage
of DFID's budget—less than 1% in 2007. They believed that
because slums are "no longer peripheral settlements"
but have evolved into "central, distinctive components that
have become the defining characteristic of cities in the developing
world", more resources must be committed to slums generally
and housing specifically.[138]
Slum dwellers and other low income urban groups need targeted
support to improve their living conditions. Housing microfinance
offers an effective and sustainable route towards funding these
improvements. We recommend that DFID explore options for strengthening
funding of housing microfinance schemes, as a way to boost the
current relatively low level of financing it allocates
to the housing sector.
HEALTH
75. Living conditions within poor urban settlements
mean that residents have additional and specific health needs.
Key urban health challenges include polluting household fuels,
poor quality of housing and unsafe locations affected by flooding
or pollution. Low levels of hygiene, due to insufficient water
and sanitation coverage, bring a heightened risk of diarrhoeal
diseases. This, together with poor nutrition, causes particular
risks for children. For instance, in Nairobi infant and child
mortality rates are three times higher within slums than the city
average.[139]
76. The spread of HIV/AIDS, as well as other communicable
diseases such as tuberculosis, adds to urban health risks.[140]
HIV-positive street children represent a particularly hard-to-reach
group for health providers.[141]
Witnesses highlighted the need for HIV services to be tailored
to the dynamics of the epidemic in local areas, and for community
health centres to be based within slums so that residents do not
need to make costly and difficult journeys into city centres.[142]
The UK Government's new strategy for HIV/AIDS, Achieving Universal
Access, published in 2008, does not make specific mention
of urban contexts.[143]
It is clear, however, as we have said earlier, that DFID does
not always label projects that do, in fact, benefit the urban
poor as "urban development" and that DFID's HIV/AIDS
programme includes projects in urban areas. Indeed, we visited
a DFID-supported treatment centre in Lagos run by a community
organisation that aims to work with high risk groups including
sex workers, transport workers and unemployed youth. DFID also
channels large amounts of funding to address HIV/AIDS and other
infectious diseases through multilateral bodies such as the Global
Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria.
77. Urban violence and crime, together with the stress
of poverty and drug use, increase the incidence of mental health
problems in slums and poor settlements.[144]
The UK charity Basic Needs told us how funding through DFID's
Civil Society Challenge Fund had enabled them to launch a mental
health project for slum dwellers in Kangemi informal settlement
in Kenya. By training community volunteers and carers, the project
has ensured that mental health services are integrated into existing
primary health care provision, facilitating the continuation of
these services in the future.[145]
78. Whilst urban dwellers are generally located closer
to health facilities than people in rural areas, this does not
ensure universal access. As a 2004 report by the MDG Task Force
noted, "much of urban poverty is not because of the distance
from infrastructure and services but from exclusion."[146]
As we have said, it is vital that governments and donors address
social exclusion and use carefully targeted social protection
mechanisms to ensure that all urban residents can access services.
Targeting services efficiently relies on accurate information.
Results UK said that DFID's 2008-13 Research Strategy should help
fill the current gaps in detailed understanding of the nature
of disease and health problems in slums and informal settlements.[147]
One of the six aims of the Strategy is to support research into
health and the barriers to achieving the health MDGs.[148]
79. DFID's approach to strengthening healthcare
by supporting discrete projects, channelling funds through multilateral
frameworks and providing social protection 'safety nets' is well-established.
However, there are a number of specific challenges associated
with health care provision in urban areas, especially regarding
communicable diseases such as HIV/AIDS, mental health and inequalities
in access to services. DFID should differentiate specific urban
components of its health programmes so that steps being taken
to address these particular challenges are made clear. We recommend
that DFID help ensure that international efforts are based on
a solid knowledge base by funding research into the current gaps
in detailed understanding of the nature of disease and health
problems in poor urban settlements as part of its 2008-13 Research
Strategy.
EDUCATION
80. Crowded urban settlements often do not allow
adequate space for education facilities, forcing children to travel
a long way and to study in cramped and unhygienic conditions.
Children who have to work may not go to school at all, and girls
tend to bear the brunt of helping at home and contributing to
family income.[149]
It is often difficult for children from poor households to complete
homework given the lack of electric light and space at home. Data
from UN-Habitat shows significant educational inequalities between
urban residents living in slum and non-slum areas within cities.[150]
81. Lack of formal recognition of slum areas acts
as a barrier to schooling for some children. If official planning
policies do not recognise an informal settlement, government schools
will not be built in the area. In Kibera slum in Nairobi, the
lack of government schools means that children there are not benefiting
from the Kenyan Government's free education policy. Results UK
believed that DFID should work with partner countries to tackle
the issue of official recognition of slums so that more free local
schools could be built in such areas. They also argued for targeted
interventions that address specific urban problems such as child
labour. [151]
The Consortium for Street Children (CSC) agreed:
Tailored education programmes that assimilate
vulnerable children working and living on the streets into the
formal education system are crucial. NGOs working on the ground
are ideally placed to support these initiatives but are as always
poorly funded.[152]
The CSC gave the example of a recent joint project
between the Government of Tanzania and a local charity, the Faraja
Trust, under which schools are being built within slums that cater
to the particular needs of vulnerable children, especially street
children. The project helps them to catch up with the education
they have missed before facilitating their reintegration into
the school system (which avoids the creation of parallel school
systems). Children are assisted with school fees (secondary schools),
transport fares, school uniforms and medical support.[153]
82. As with its support to other basic services,
DFID does not always classify education projects under the banner
of "urban development". We believe that, as with
healthcare, there are a number of specific challenges associated
with education provision in urban areas, including cramped and
unhygienic classroom conditions, the problem of absenteeism due
to child labour (especially for girls) and a lack of government
schools due to non-recognition of informal settlements. Similar
steps to differentiate specific urban components of DFID's education
programmes are needed to identify the measures being taken to
address these challenges and enhance interventions where necessary.
We recommend that DFID work with partner country governments to
tackle the issue of official recognition of slums so that more
local schools can be provided for children in slum areas.
SANITATION AND WATER
83. MDG 7, Target 10, seeking to reduce by half the
proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking
water and basic sanitation, is off-track in most regions.[154]
Africa is the region least likely to reach the target on current
trends.[155] Around
half of urban dwellers in sub-Saharan Africa do not currently
have adequate water supplies, and it is likely that over half
have no access to basic sanitation.[156]
The absence of clean water and sanitation in poor urban areas
is responsible for a heavy burden of cholera and diarrhoeal diseases.
The lack of households connected to sewers is a key contributory
factor to this. It is estimated that providing universal sewerage
could save 326,000 infant lives per year.[157]
84. Municipal authorities are often unwilling to
provide water and sanitation services to informal settlements.[158]
In many cities in Sub-Saharan Africa less than 50% of the population
are supplied by the public water utility.[159]
Poor urban dwellers can spend 5-10% of their income on purchasing
water from vendors or kiosks because no piped supplies are available
in their homes.[160]
In Lagos, we heard how the water sector was failing to meet demand:
its ability to supply 170 million gallons of water a day fell
far below demand which was in the region of 700-800 million gallons.
The poor paid much more for water than more affluent residents
as they had to buy from vendors rather than the state.
85. We were told that the most effective way to improve
sanitation in slums is for governments to work with communities,
as evidenced by the Orangi Project in Pakistan.[161]
In 1980 a group of citizens from Orangi, an informal settlement
in Karachi, and a local NGO formed the Orangi Pilot Project to
address the dire sanitation situation. Through dialogue and awareness-raising,
residents formed groups to build sewer channels to collect household
waste. Eventually the municipal authority agreed to finance a
trunk sewer to channel the collective waste away from the community.
The infant mortality rate fell from 128 per 1000 live births in
1982 to 37 per 1000 in 1991. Efforts have continued since and
it is estimated that almost 90% of Karachi's population now uses
some kind of sewerage system, half of it built by communities.[162]
86. In other parts of Asia and particularly in India,
community groups, often formed by women, have made sanitation
a key part of their urban development activities by using the
construction of toilet blocks as a means to engage with the community.[163]
Once con-struction is underway, the groups negotiate with local
government and, if successful, can then expand the project using
government funding.[164]
We will return to the importance of community-led initiatives,
and how DFID can support them, in Chapter 4.
87. DFID has funded a number of water and sanitation
initiatives in South Asia. It estimates that its funding of the
Andhra Pradesh Urban Services Programme (£94.4 million for
the period 1999-2008) has enabled one million poor people to access
basic water and sanitation services.[165]
We were impressed to hear about the DFID-supported initiative
in Bangladesh that we described in Chapter 2 which simultaneously
addresses sanitation concerns (blocked drains) and extreme weather
events connected with climate change (flooding).[166]
88. Whilst we were pleased to hear of these projects,
we were aware once again that DFID could give us few examples
of support to sanitation and water in urban contexts within African
countries. Clearly, international initiatives to which DFID contributes
benefit a number of African countries, including CLIFF, which
works in Kenya and has provided access to sanitation for over
800,000 slum dwellers.[167]
DFID also supports Water and Sanitation for the Urban Poor (WSUP,
£3.95 million for the period October 2005-April 2009), an
international partnership of public, private and civil society
organisations which aims to reach 3.5 million people by 2015.[168]
WSUP works with local service providers in a number of African
countries, including Kenya, Madagascar, Mozambique and Zambia,
with work planned in Ghana and Mali, to build their long term
capacity to serve the poor, with the involvement of the community.[169]
When we asked the DFID Minister whether funding would be renewed
for this initiative, he said a decision would be made based on
a forthcoming evaluation of the project.[170]
89. We welcome the support to water and sanitation
that DFID is providing through its India programme. However, we
are aware once again that there are few examples of DFID support
to these essential services in African countries. We assume that
DFID provides some support through country programme work but
we were not given details of this. It is also clear that DFID
provides support through international initiatives such as the
Community-Led Infrastructure and Finance Facility and the Water
and Sanitation for the Urban Poor partnership. These are both
highly commendable ventures, and we urge DFID to extend its funding
of these and other projects with strong community participation.
We recommend that DFID carefully consider whether it is doing
enough to help meet the MDG 7 target to halve the proportion of
people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic
sanitation, especially within urban contexts in Africa, the
region which is most off-track on this target.
90. In its new water and sanitation policy, DFID
does acknowledge the "distinct challenges" within urban
areas but states that it will continue to direct "a lot"
of its support to sanitation and water in rural areas. It bases
this judgment on UN statistics which indicate
that 70% of people without improved sanitation and 80% of people
using unimproved sources of drinking water live in rural areas.[171]
UN-Habitat told us that there is evidence to suggest that sanitation
provision in urban areas, particularly within African countries,
is now far worse than in rural areas.[172]
Thus it would seem that there are anomalies within the methods
used to assess relative need amongst urban and rural populations.
In our 2007 report on Sanitation and Water, we recommended
that DFID "revisit its prioritisation of rural over urban
support as the global urbanisation process continues".[173]
This re-assessment relates to the point we made earlier about
working from accurate measurements of urban poverty.
91. We recommend that DFID keep under careful
review the commitment in its new Water and Sanitation Policy to
continue to direct much of its support to sanitation and water
in rural areas. Undoubtedly, provision in many rural and remote
areas is very low. But the balance of need may be shifting in
line with the trend of urbanisation; services in urban areas,
particularly within the sanitation sector in Africa, are often
very poor. In order for DFID to make informed choices about where
to commit its resources, it will need to ensure it is working
from accurate measures of urban poverty. We reiterate our earlier
recommendation that DFID encourage the World Bank and other key
international institutions to explore new systems for measuring
urban poverty.
ENERGY AND TRANSPORT
92. These two essential services together are often
neglected in assessments of urban poverty. This was reflected
in the paucity of evidence we received on them. However, our visit
to Nigeria underlined to us the need significantly to increase
international efforts to improve the provision of energy and transport
services within poor urban settlements. Firstly, the issue of
energy supply. There were frequent power-cuts in the three cities
we visited—Lagos, Kano and Abuja. We heard that the reasons
behind the power sector's serious deficiencies included the need
for: better maintenance of existing systems; reforms to electricity
utilities; a regulatory framework for the power industry and for
fixed tariffs; and new investments in the sector. We were told
that Nigeria generates the same amount of electricity for its
150 million population as that consumed by Bradford—a city
of 300,000 people.
93. We saw how deficient power connections make poor
peoples' lives much harder. Homes within urban settlements often
have no electric light or heat for cooking, and households must
instead use fires with potentially damaging fumes. Many homeowners
and small businesses are forced to turn to expensive privately-owned
generators rather than the national grid, which provides just
3,000 of the 10,000 megawatts needed. We heard in Kano how the
lack of power acts as a deterrent to people setting up new businesses.
94. We were told that, despite there being no national
power strategy, the power supply was a priority for President
Yar'Adua, and that the Federal Government had $5 billion put aside
to address power issues. State governments were looking at alternative
energy sources: for example, Kano State was yet to decide whether
hydropower or oil was the most suitable option to increase electricity
generation.
95. DFID provides its support to the power sector
through the Nigeria Infrastructure Advisory Facility (£13.5
million for the period 2007-12) which offers technical assistance
to government to improve planning, management, implementation
and maintenance of infrastructure investment and related regulatory
functions within the power, transport and water sectors. DFID's
partner within its joint Country Partnership Strategy, the World
Bank, is stepping up lending to help the Nigerian Government introduce
essential reforms, as is the African Development Bank.
96. During our visit, we also witnessed the weighty
challenge posed by poor urban transport provision. Lagos, in particular,
will require substantial investment if services are to be improved.
The population has outgrown the system; with no integrated transport
service, the streets are over-run with unregulated minibuses and
road journeys can take many hours. This causes huge problems for
inhabitants of poor areas trying to travel across the city to
work.
97. The Lagos Metropolitan Area Transport Authority
has developed a strategy, backed with $100 million from the World
Bank, to improve the flow of traffic and strengthen the transport
sector. Lagos had recently entered into a public-private partnership
to fund a new toll road. A total investment of $400 million had
been leveraged by $3.5 million of government funding. DFID supports
improvements to the transport sector through the Nigeria Infrastructure
Advisory Facility.
98. The challenges associated with providing adequate
power and transport services within poor urban areas were self-evident
during our visit to Nigeria. Lack of electricity and constraints
upon movement around cities makes life even more difficult for
poor people and limits their ability to escape poverty by running
their own businesses or going out to work. We were pleased to
see that DFID is supporting the Nigerian Government to strengthen
both sectors through the Nigeria Infrastructure Advisory Facility.
We urge DFID and the World Bank to continue to boost investment
in these sectors in Nigeria and in other African and Asian countries
to ensure that power and transport services assist, rather than
hold back, the process of poverty reduction. We will discuss
these issues in more detail in our forthcoming report on DFID's
Programme in Nigeria.
116 Ev 77 Back
117
Ev 77 Back
118
Ev 77 Back
119
Ev 77 Back
120
Q 13 [Michael Mutter] Back
121
Ev 121 Back
122
Ev 73 Back
123
Q 52 Back
124
Q 169 Back
125
Ev 133 Back
126
Ev 77 Back
127
Ev 171 Back
128
Ev 171 Back
129
Ev 78 Back
130
Ev 118 Back
131
Q 156 [Larry English] Back
132
Ev 77-78 Back
133
Ev 114 Back
134
Ev 114 Back
135
Inter Press Service News Agency, "World Faces Prospect of
Teeming Mega-Slums", 13 September 2005 Back
136
"Microfinance" refers to the provision of financial
services to low-income households and clients, and can include
"microcredit" which addresses poor people's banking
needs. Back
137
Ev 152-153 Back
138
Ev 113 Back
139
"Our cities, our health, our future", Report to the
WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health from the Knowledge
Network on Urban Settings (2008), Executive Summary, p.vii Back
140
Ev 155-156 Back
141
Q 64 [Gordon McGranahan] Back
142
Qq 63-64 Back
143
HM Government, Achieving Universal Access: the UK's strategy for
halting and reversing the spread of HIV in the developing world
(2008) Back
144
Ev 60 Back
145
Ev 59 Back
146
Millennium Development Goals Task Force 8 report, 2004, quoted
in "Our cities, our health, our future", p.viii Back
147
Ev 155 Back
148
DFID, Research Strategy 2008-2013. The other five aims are: growth;
sustainable agriculture; climate change; governance in challenging
environments; and future challenges and opportunities. Back
149
Ev 157 Back
150
Ev 156 Back
151
Ev 157 Back
152
Ev 69 Back
153
Q 66 and Ev 69 Back
154
See International Development Committee, Sixth Report of Session
2006-07, Sanitation and Water, HC 126-1 Back
155
MDGs: 2008 Progress Chart, online at http://mdgs.un.org
Back
156
WaterAid, "What we do - Urban", online at http://www.wateraid.org/uk/what_we_do/policy_and_research/6165.asp
Back
157
iD21 Research Highlight, "Public investment in sewers is
necessary and affordable", Public Services International
(12 December 2008), online at www.id21.org
and "Sewerage Works: Public investment in sewers saves lives",
Public Services International Research Unit, by David Hall and
Emanuele Lobina, University of Greenwich (2008) Back
158
Q 69 Back
159
WELL Resource Centre for Water, Sanitation and Environmental Health
Briefing Note "PSP in Urban Water Supply", December
2006 Back
160
Ev 137 Back
161
Q 69 and Q 142 Back
162
"Lessons from Karachi: the Role of Demonstration, Documentation,
Mapping and Relationship Building in Advocacy for improved Urban
Sanitation and Water Services", Human Settlements Discussion
Paper Series, Theme: Water 6, IIED, by Arif Pervaiz, Perween Rahman
with Arif Hasan, August 2008, p.2 Back
163
Q 69 Back
164
Q 155 Back
165
DFID, "Water: an increasingly precious resource. Sanitation:
a matter of dignity" (2008), p.36 Back
166
Q 214 Back
167
Ev 77 Back
168
Ev 78 Back
169
Projects are also being implemented in India and Bangladesh, with
work planned in Brazil. Back
170
Q 206 Back
171
DFID, "Water: an increasingly precious resource. Sanitation:
a matter of dignity" (2008), p.36 Back
172
Q 32 Back
173
See International Development Committee, Sixth Report of Session
2006-07, Sanitation and Water, HC 126-1, Para 41 Back
| 
