Indicator Code: ACSAT
Objective: Environmental Health
Policy Category: Environmental Health
Subcategory: Water (Effects on Humans)
Indicator Short Name: Adequate Sanitation
Indicator Full Name: Percentage of Population with Access to Improved Sanitation
Indicator Description: Adequate Sanitation measures the percentage of a country’s population that has acess to an improved source of sanitation.
Units: Percentage
Country Coverage: 214
Reference Year: 2004 or MRYA
Target: 100% coverage
Target Source: MDG 7, Target 10, Indicator 31
Short Source: WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation, 2006
Source: World Development Indicators,
http://devdata.worldbank.org/dataonline/old-default.htm
World Health Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund. Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council. Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment, 2000 Report, Geneva and New York. Last updated data in November 2006, available at
http://www.childinfo.org/areas/sanitation/countrydata.php
Other sources: Millenium Development Goals Indicators, Millennium Indicators
Taiwan: Department of Environmental Monitoring and Information Management, EPA.
Source URL: http://devdata.worldbank.org/dataonline/old-default.htm
http://www.childinfo.org/areas/sanitation/countrydata.php
Methodology: Improved sanitation technologies are: connection to a public sewer, connection to septic system, pour-flush latrine, simple pit latrine, ventilated improved pit latrine. The excreta disposal system is considered adequate if it is private or shared (but not public) and if hygienically separates human excreta from human contact. “Not improved” are: service or bucket latrines (where excreta are manually removed), public latrines, latrines with an open pit. The total population of a country may comprise either all usual residents of the country (de jure population) or all persons present in the country (de facto population) at the time of the census. For purposes of international comparisons, the de facto definition is recommended. (Source: United Nations. Multilingual Demographic Dictionary, English Section. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Studies, No. 29, United Nations publication, Sales No. E.58.XIII.4).
Values for Iran and Oman are 2000 values. Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Portugal, Korea, Great Britain, Aruba, Bahrain, Bermuda, Brunei Darussalam, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Faeroe Islands, Gibraltar, Greenland, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China, Israel, Kuwait, Liechtenstein, Macao Special Administrative Region of China, Malta, Puerto Rico, San Marino, Slovenia and Holy See were also set to 100 on the basis that their per capita incomes exceeded US$15,971, which is the empirical threshold beyond which all countries have 100% coverage. Lithuania, Macedonia and Poland were imputed based on the regression model predicting ACSAT using log of per-capita income, and Saudi Arabia were imputed using a model that included WATSUP and log per capita income.
Additional Citation: not available
Hi. For this indicator the EPI value on the Excel spreadsheet for Argentina is 91,3412563667233. Why are you using so many decimals? Also, I checked the source (the World Bank is not available for the general public) and the most recent data (2001) shows 92% for the urban sector and 77% for the rural sector. The EPI value only shows urban sectors? Thanks in advance for the clarifications.