Domestic water and sanitation provide examples of a situation where long-term, target-driven efforts have been launched with the objective of reducing the proportion of people who are water-insecure, most recently through the millennium development goals (MDGs) framework. Impacts of these efforts have been monitored by an increasingly evidence-based system, and plans for the next period of international policy, which are likely to aim at universal coverage with basic water and sanitation, are being currently developed. As distinct from many other domains to which the concept of water security is applied, domestic or personal water security requires a perspective that incorporates the reciprocal notions of provision and risk, as the current status of domestic water and sanitation security is dominated by deficiency This paper reviews the interaction of science and technology with policies, practice and monitoring, and explores how far domestic water can helpfully fit into the proposed concept of water security, how that is best defined, and how far the human right to water affects the situation. It is considered that they fit well together in terms both of practical planning of targets and indicators and as a conceptual framework to help development. The focus needs to be broad, to extend beyond households, to emphasize maintenance as well as construction and to increase equity of access. International and subnational monitoring need to interact, and monitoring results need to be meaningful to service providers as well as users.

Despite some progress, universal access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) by 2030—a remit of Sustainable Development Goal 6—remains a distant prospect in many countries. Policy-makers and implementers of the WASH sector are challenged to track a new path. This research aimed to identify core orienting themes of the sector, as legacies of past processes, which can provide insights for its future. We reviewed global policy, science and programmatic documents and carried out 19 expert interviews to track the evolution of the global WASH sector over seven decades. We situated this evolution in relation to wider trends in global health and development over the same time period. With transnational flows of concern, expertise and resources from high-income to lower-income countries, the WASH sector evolved over decades of international institutionalisation of health and development with (1) a focus on technologies (technicalisation), (2) a search for generalised solutions (universalisation), (3) attempts to make recipients responsible for environmental health (responsibilisation) and (4) the shaping of programmes around quantifiable outcomes (metricisation). The emergent commitment of the WASH sector to these core themes reflects a pragmatic response in health and development to depoliticise poverty and social inequalities in order to enable action. This leads to questions about what potential solutions have been obscured, a recognition which might be understood as ‘uncomfortable knowledge’—the knowns that have had to be unknown, which resonate with concerns about deep inequalities, shrinking budgets and the gap between what could and has been achieved.

Impacts of climate change adaptation strategies need to be evaluated using principled methods spanning sectors and longer time frames. We propose machine-learning approaches to study the long-term impacts of flood protection in Bangladesh. Available data include socio-economic survey and events data (death, migration, etc.) from 1983–2014. These multidecadal data, rare in their extent and quality, provide a basis for using machine-learning approaches even though the data were not collected or designed to assess the impact of the flood control investments. We test whether the embankment has affected the welfare of people over time, benefiting those living inside more than those living outside. Machine-learning approaches enable learning patterns in data to help discriminate between two groups: here households living inside vs. outside. They also help identify the most informative indicators of discrimination and provide robust metrics to evaluate the quality of the model. Overall, we find no significant difference between inside/outside populations based on welfare, migration, or mortality indicators. However, we note a significant difference in inward/outward movement with respect to the embankment. While certain data gaps and spatial heterogeneity in sampled populations suggest caution in any conclusive interpretation of the flood protection infrastructure, we do not see higher benefits accruing to those living with higher levels of protection. This has implications for Bangladesh’s planning for future and more extreme climate futures, including the national Delta Plan, and global investments in climate resilient infrastructure to create positive social impacts.