The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), announced in September 2015, present a vision of achieving a higher level of human health and well-being worldwide by the year 2030. The SDG targets specific to water and sanitation call for more detailed monitoring and response to understand the coverage and quality of safely managed sources. It is hoped that improved monitoring of water and sanitation interventions will reveal more cost-effective and efficient ways of meeting the SDGs. In this paper, we review the landscape of approaches that can be used to support and improve on the water and sanitation targets SDG 6.1, “By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all”, and SDG 6.2, “By 2030, achieve access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all and end open defecation, paying special attention to the needs of women and girls and those in vulnerable situations”.

This paper estimates two sources of benefits related to sanitation infrastructure access: a direct benefit households receive when they have access to sanitation infrastructure, and an external benefit produced by the neighborhood's access to sanitation infrastructure. Using a sample of children under age four from rural areas of India in the Third Round of District Level Household Survey 2007–08, the study demonstrates evidence of positive direct benefits and a concave positive externality for improved sanitation and fixed-point defecation. The paper finds that a child who moves from a household without improved sanitation and a low ratio of village access to a household with improved sanitation and a high ratio of village access enjoys a reduction in diarrhea prevalence of 47 percent. From this, one-fourth of this benefit is due to the direct benefit, leaving the rest to external gains. These results hold under several robustness checks.

The paper presents the development and implementation of a geo-spatial model for mapping populations’ access to specified types of water and sanitation services in Nigeria. The analysis uses geo-referenced, population-representative data from the National Water and Sanitation Survey 2015, along with relevant geo-spatial covariates. The model generates predictions for levels of access to seven indicators of water and sanitation services across Nigeria at a resolution of 1 × 1 km². Overall, the findings suggest a sharp urban–rural divide in terms of access to improved water, basic water, and improved water on premises, a low availability of piped water on premises and of sewerage systems throughout the country, a high concentration of improved sanitation in select states, and low rates of nationwide open defecation, with a few pockets of high rates of open defecation in the central and southern non-coastal regions. Predictions promise to hone the targeting of policies meant to improve access to basic services in various regions of the country.

Infrastructure investment is a central part of the stimulus plans of the Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) region as it confronts the growing financial crisis. This article estimates the potential effects on direct, indirect and induced employment for different types of infrastructure projects with LAC-specific variables. The analysis finds that the direct and indirect short-term employment generation potential of infrastructure capital investment projects may be considerable—averaging around 40,000 annual jobs per US$ 1billion in LAC, depending upon such variables as the mix of sub-sectors in the investment programme; the technologies deployed; local wages for skilled and unskilled labour; and the degrees of leakages to imported inputs. While these numbers do not account for a substitution effect, they are built around an assumed ‘basket’ of investments that crosses infrastructure sectors most of which are not employment-maximising. Albeit limited in scope, rural road maintenance projects may employ 200,000 to 500,000 annualised direct jobs for every US$ 1billion spent. The article also describes the potential risks to effective infrastructure investment in an environment of crisis including sorting and planning contradictions, delayed implementation and impact, affordability and corruption.

Policy makers are often confronted with a myriad of factors in the investment decision-making process. This issue is particularly acute in infrastructure decisions since these often involve large sums and lock-in technologies. In regions and countries where the infrastructure access gap is large and public budgets severely constrained, the importance of considering the different facets of the decision-making process becomes even more relevant. This is the case for South Asia. This article presents the infrastructure access gap in South Asia and discusses the impacts that this gap has in South Asian economies. It examines the links between the infrastructure and economic growth and infrastructure and welfare/poverty. The article reviews different methodologies to measure these impacts and hence serve as mechanisms to establish priorities. Finally, the article presents a methodology to holistically equate trade-offs among different policy objectives per key infrastructure sectors.