https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5476-9673
Figures
Abstract
Climate change threatens the safety of water supplies globally, but small water supplies in rapidly growing and urbanizing towns in low- and middle-income countries are especially at risk. Despite the efforts of the Government of Ethiopia, research shows that that small-town water utilities in Ethiopia are poorly equipped to prioritize developing and maintaining climate-resilient water services. We applied the How tough is WASH framework for climate resilient water supplies to ten town water utilities in Eastern Ethiopia to identify their strengths and weaknesses in preparing for climate change. We found reports of weak institutional support from service authorities and exclusion of climate risk management from trainings, which cascades down to service providers in the form of lack of emergency response, inadequate staffing and financial mismanagement. This is consistent with previous studies on sustainability of town water utilities, and highlights the applicability of this tool into existing monitoring frameworks that have been proposed for town water utilities in Ethiopia. We also modified the How tough is WASH framework to capture these findings and better reflect the complexity of a utility-managed piped water supply.
Citation: Geremew A, Nijhawan A, Mengistie B, Mekbib D, Flint A, Howard G (2024) Climate resilience of small-town water utilities in Eastern Ethiopia. PLOS Water 3(5): e0000158. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000158
Editor: Bimlesh Kumar, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, INDIA
Received: July 28, 2023; Accepted: March 12, 2024; Published: May 6, 2024
Copyright: © 2024 Geremew et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: The data used for the publication are fully available as part of the submitted article.
Funding: This research was conducted by the financial support of Pervoli African Research Center (PARC) with grant award number D100235-101/86440 (Abraham Geremew, Bezatu Mengistie, and Dinku Mekbib received £3700, £3100 and £2500 respectively to execute the research; and Anisha Nijhawan from University of Bristol received £6252.30 for part of her salary and funds to travel to the study area for technical support and supervision). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
A growing body of evidence shows that water supplies are experiencing the impacts of climate change [1, 2]. Intense rainfall, severe storms, dry spells, extremely hot days, and storm surges damage or destroy water supply infrastructure and reduce the availability of water resources [1, 2], all of which have an impact on water supply and quality [1–7]. This has amplified concerns in the water and sanitation (WASH) sector, resulting in increased efforts to improve services in the low and middle-income countries, where climate change may have the most severe impacts [8–11]. In urban areas, climate change exerts additional pressure on the operation of water utilities [12]. Even though strategies for drinking water safety management that address risks related to climate variability and change are urgently needed [1, 2], resilience is frequently a secondary priority in low-income countries, due to financial limitations [13].
Ethiopia is one of the most vulnerable countries to climate variability and climate change due to its low adaptive capacity to deal with these changes [14–16]. Climate-related risks are already apparent in the country, with evidence indicating that existing climate variability, along with rising demand for water, is already stressing systems and services [17, 18]. Small and medium towns in the country i.e., settlements with a population above 2000, face the additional stress of rapid population growth [19, 20]. It has been difficult to maintain water and sanitation systems in these towns due to rapid increase in demand, ageing infrastructure, weak institutional capacities, lack of finance, and difficulties with cost recovery [21].
Recognizing these challenges, the Government of Ethiopia launched the One WASH PLUS programme to strengthen piped water provision in small towns through town water utilities, which are autonomous enterprises regulated by a Water Board [22]. As part of this programme, a sustainability check framework was proposed to monitor the performance of such utilities [23]. Application of this framework in small towns revealed unreliable services with inadequate water supply quantities; low cost recovery and technical capacity in small-town utility-managed water supplies [24, 25]. This does not bode well for the ability of these systems to prepare for climate change. While utility-managed piped water supplies are considered more climate resilient than community-managed point-sources [26], and can result in lower overall costs compared to point source water supplies [27] the management of systems of increased complexity requires substantial training and post-construction technical support.
As the Government of Ethiopia seeks to improve access to piped water supplies and build resilience in the water supply sector, current weaknesses in these services must be addressed. This will require integrating climate resilience into planning and monitoring service provision [28, 29]. The recognition of the aspects that make services more resilient to climate change is growing, however more data is required to assess risks, develop indicators and plan adaptation at the service provider and service authority level [26].
Thus, the objectives of this study were to identify current and potential risks to town water utilities from climate stresses and propose indicators for monitoring. We used the How tough is WASH conceptual framework [30], which has previously been tested on community-managed rural water supplies in Ethiopia to assess the resilience of small-town water utilities to climate change. We also sought to adapt the indicators within the framework for town water utilities, based on our findings.
Materials and methods
Study area
We conducted this study in ten towns of the east Hararghe Zone of the Oromia region and the Fafen Zone of the Somali region, Eastern Ethiopia (Fig 1). The two regions are the most vulnerable to climate change impacts in the country [31, 32]. East Hararghe zone is one of the drought-prone areas in the Oromia region. The zone is classified into three agro-ecological zones. Dega (highland) covers 7.67%, Woinadega (mid-altitude) 24.5% and the remaining 67.76% of the Zone represents Kolla (lowland). The zone is frequently affected by extreme drought affecting people and animals and leading to thousands of people being displaced [33]. In the zone, 8.27% of the population is urban inhabitant, 1.11% is pastoralist, 17% is agro-pastoralists, and the rest is agriculturalist (74%). The Somali region, from where the two towns were selected, is one of the most affected regions in the country [34]. Two towns are located in the Fafen zone of the region. This zone is located in the Wahit Shebelle River Basin, which comprises the drainage of the seasonal rivers of Fafan, Jerar, and Dakhato. In the Fafen zone, the most successful boreholes are available, and seasonal rivers play a significant role as a water resource. Of the ten towns included in the study, the town with a high percentage of households having piped water coverage is Chalanko (85%), and the town with a low percentage is Awedaya (20%), according to the data we received from each town. Moreover, towns that chlorinate water regularly are Bombas, Haramaya, Kersa, Kulubi, and Woter.
The management of town water utilities in Ethiopia
According to national guidelines for urban water supply and sewerage services [35], the water supply is managed by the town water utility established by the town administration. There is a water board composed of representatives from the town administration, pertinent local government offices (such as the water office, health office, finance, economic development office, and education office), and customers to lead the overall activity of the service. The town Water Utility manager is responsible for organizing, directing, and administering the activities of the utility and its staff within the different sections (human resources development, finance and property administration, operation and maintenance, etc.).
Study approach
We carried out a cross-sectional study employing both quantitative and qualitative methods in two rounds in August and December 2022. For the quantitative survey, we interviewed a representative sample of households. We estimated 630 households using a single population proportion formula with the assumption of 50% resilience, 4% margin of error, 95% CI, and 10% non-response rate. To investigate how the framework might be applied, we purposefully chose ten towns from two of Ethiopia’s regions, Oromia and Somali. All households within the town using piped water were identified based on the information gathered from each town water utility. We then distributed the sample proportionally to each study town (Table 1). We used a simple random sample technique to select households from each town. Household selection was made after obtaining the list of households from the town water utility.
For qualitative data collection, all the operators and managers of the water utility in each town were included. We also interviewed one community representative, who is a board member of the water utility, from each town to explore the community’s role in the water utility. All the water supply sources and reservoirs in each town were assessed to explore their quality and potential risks including being flooded and inundation with rivers.
Method of data collection
We used the six domains in the How Tough is WASH framework [30] to design data collection tools including household surveys and key informant interview guides. The household survey was designed to collect data on socio-demographic characteristics, water supply characteristics, household awareness of climate change impacts, the frequency and duration of climate hazards experienced, the extent to which climate hazards disrupt water supply service or access, and household responses to the expected and experienced exposure to climate hazards. Additionally, an observational checklist, based on the World Health Organization’s sanitary inspection forms [36] was used by enumerators to identify risks in the environment around the water infrastructure or in its immediate vicinity that may make them susceptible to climate threats (See S1 Appendix). The tools (survey and observational checklist) were developed in English, translated to the local languages Oromiffa and Somali, and then translated back to English to ensure consistency before being administered digitally using portable devices. The data were stored using Kobo Toolbox (Kobo collect version v2022.1.2) for easy storage and sharing.
Qualitative data was collected from technicians, persons in charge of managing the water utility, and community representatives in each town through semi-structured interviews. Topic guides were developed based on the How Tough is WASH framework [30] to gather information on institutional and operational aspects of the water supply (See S2 Appendix). Ten technicians operating the water supply service were interviewed about the existing water supply services, changes in water quality and quantity due to climate change, challenges associated with the operation and maintenance of water infrastructure, and coping mechanisms of climate change impacts on water supply. The water utility managers were interviewed regarding the existing support and training provided by local and regional authorities, and challenges. Interview topic guides were prepared in English and translated into Oromia and Somali. The key informant interviews were carried out in the local languages. The sessions were taped, transcribed, and translated into English.
Free residual chlorine and microbial testing of tap water were conducted during the two rounds of data collection. The microbial test was done on the water samples collected from each water source using a membrane filtration technique [36]. Free residual chlorine was measured from the sample of water source and point-of-use of households claimed to treat before drinking. The residual chlorine measurement was done by the Palintest DPD chlorine method by taking a 10 ml sample of water stored in the house and reservoirs. Free chlorine reacts with diethyl-p-phenylene diamine (DPD) in a buffered solution to produce a pink color. The concentration of free residual chlorine was recorded by comparing the mark reading of a pink color to a color comparator.
Data analysis
The data from household surveys were checked for completeness and analyzed descriptively to determine the user’s role in the resilience of water supply services. For the in-depth interviews, digital recordings of technicians, managers, and community representatives were transcribed and coded deductively based on the predefined list of codes. Codes based on the indicator from How tough is WASH framework were developed to ensure that the data from the interviews could be used to score the resilience of the water supplies. Environmental risks around the communities such as elevation, slope, and land cover/land use were mapped on ArcGIS and the risk proneness of the water sources was determined using Digital Elevation Modeling.
Ethical considerations
The research was carried out as a follow-up to the "How Tough is WASH" project, which was approved by the Ministry of Science and Technology in 2019. The Ministry waived ethical review due to the research project’s non-sensitive ethical issues. However, we followed the principles of ethics and verbally consented to participate with each participant after presenting the study’s objectives and advantages in front of a local water utility expert. Additionally, the confidentiality of the study participants’ data was ensured. Moreover, before the start of research activities, an official letter was delivered to each study town administration, and a copy was given to data collectors for household interviews.
Results
1. Water supply infrastructure
Deep wells and springs were the primary water sources in the study communities. Out of ten water supplies, only three had protection measures at the water supply source. The others had at least one source without any protection measures (Table 2). Our sanitary risk assessment using a WHO inspection checklist showed that the water source for the town of Fafen high sanitary risks, while the other eight had intermediate risks. The water supply yield in four towns, Babile, Bombas, Fafen, and Woter, varied seasonally and fell short of user demand, therefore the population switched to other water sources. Five towns, notably Bombas, Chalanko, Haramaya, Kulubi, and Woter, had leakages in the distribution system.
No operator records on water quality or frequency of testing were available in any of the study towns. The water quality assessment at the water source revealed that Bombas and Fafen had the highest colony forming units (CFU) per 100ml, 26 and 168 CFU/100 mL, respectively. However, single water quality measurements cannot be used to draw links between sanitary protection and contamination. In the absence of long-term water quality data, no associations between coliform levels and sanitary risks were explored.
2. Catchment
The assessment of catchments of both the water sources and reservoirs showed that there is less dense habitation around each town’s water sources. No other human activity affects the availability of water except Haramaya, where irrigation and truck transportation of water to other communities occur. Except Chalanko and Kersa, open defecation did occur near the catchment areas of the water sources for the other eight study towns. The flood vulnerability assessment of the water sources and reservoirs in the study towns revealed that the Chalanko water source is quite prone to flooding whereas the Kulubi water source is just moderately vulnerable. Moreover, one of Kersa’s water sources is extremely vulnerable to flooding, as are the water sources in Woter and Lange. From the digital elevation modeling, the water sources of Haramaya, Aweday, Babile, and Bombas generally had low flood vulnerability risk.
3. Management and governance
Our assessment showed that the towns with technicians and personnel for financial management are Chalanko, Haramaya, Aweday, and Babile. Bombas, Fafen, Kersa, and Woter are water utilities with limited personnel for repair and maintenance. Only two water utilities—in Kersa and Kulubi—monitored water quality, including microbial testing. According to the town water utilities’ response, chlorination of water is taking place in Bombas, Haramaya, Kersa, Kulubi, and Woter. The water utility in Chalanko and Lange reported treating water inconsistently.
The lack of adequate personnel made it challenging for utilities to plan for system upgrades and develop emergency plans. Utilities are unable to expand the water supply to meet the demands of a growing population or monitoring rainfall or groundwater levels. However, some managers gave anecdotal evidence of change in ground water. In Fafen, the water supply manager reported hand dug wells drying up in recent years. It was also reported that in areas where previously pit latrines could not be dug because of high groundwater table, now communities were able to dig deeper without hitting water.
The utilities also struggle with financial mismanagement. Although more than half the household respondents reported paying water bills regularly, key informant interviews with managers indicated inconsistent bill payment by customers. This is in part due to limited staff in the utilities to read meter readings and accurately bill all households. Instead, households are charged based on estimates. Secondly, there were reports of vandalism of meters by residents to avoid paying their bill and finally, not all households with water connections were given a meter. To address this, utilities are planning to introduce metering services to all households with the goal of improving financial sustainability and incentivize customers to engage in water conservation. Without this added financial inflow, the managers reported that they would not be able to respond to the growing threats to their water supplies.
4. Community governance and engagement
Our analysis of the water users’ awareness of how climate change would affect their water supply and ways to adapt indicated that Bombas, Chalanko, Fafen, Lange, and Woter are the towns with the highest percentage of residents who are aware of the issue. Bombas, Fafen, and Woter were the towns where more than 70% of families felt that they were exposed to climate change.
Less than one-tenth (9%) of houses in the study towns treat water at the point of use. Woter and Babile are the towns with the highest percentage of households that treat water at the point of use. Even though chlorination was the most frequent treatment method, our results demonstrated that less than half of the treated water contained free residual chlorine.
During times of emergency or water scarcity brought on by extreme events, the majority of people switched to unimproved sources. During disruption to their primary water supplies, every household in the remaining three towns either bought water from private companies or shifted to unimproved water sources.
Most of the community representatives interviewed were dissatisfied with their water supply, claiming that the water supply could not keep up with the growing population (Fafen water utility) and there were interruptions for at least five and sometimes up to 15 days per month (Awaday water supply).
5. Supply-chain
Water utilities need to have a variety of sources for supplies of spare parts and routes to convey accessories and treatment chemicals. Except Woter, all of the study towns are situated along the major routes connecting Addis Ababa with nearby regional towns (Harar and Jigjiga), therefore access by road was not a concern reported by managers. However, transferring spare parts to a specific location when they arrive in the town might be difficult in some places, such as Woter and Chalanko (with just one route through town that experiences seasonal flooding). None of the water utilities stored spare parts like pipes, fittings, and treatment products that could be used during an emergency. In addition, there were limited markets for purchasing products and spare parts to operate and maintain the water supply. Managers must move to nearby towns to purchase the products and spare parts.
Water supply performance was also hindered by weaknesses in the local power grid, which requires better coordination between the water supply and energy departments. Most of the water supply managers reported regular power interruptions, sometimes for three months and is made worse during heavy rainfall. Only four out of the ten town water utilities (Babile, Fafen, Haramaya, and Lange) had alternative power supplies in the form of generators. Intermittent power implied that the pumps required to operate the water supply could not operate continuously.
6. Institutional support
Our assessment of the existing institutional support revealed that there is limited support and follow-up from the higher government offices to town water utilities. The main focus of discussions of meetings at the Woreda and Zonal level were day-to-day maintenance, solutions to address water shortages including linking water supplies of neighbouring towns; and the need for utilities to be financially sustainable. However, these meetings are irregular and do not cover climate change and its impacts on water supplies. Despite some regional offices developing plans for new boreholes to address increased demand, no construction has taken place.
Water supply managers also claimed that there were no risk management programs for water supplies. The only form of catchment risk management was an annual tree plantation through a green legacy initiative. There is support from higher offices including provision of spare parts, during emergencies, although it is not provided promptly.
7. Revised How Tough is WASH framework
Based on our findings, we identified key factors that can make the existing version of the How tough is WASH framework more applicable for utility-managed water supplies. The revised version of the framework is presented in Table 3.
Discussion
Climate change puts sustainable water supply in danger [26], thus slowing progress towards Sustainable Development Goals. Ethiopia’s commitment to climate-resilient WASH is through the One WASH National Programme [22]. However, despite efforts by the government and its development partners, sustainability assessments in certain rural and small towns have found that water service delivery did not comply with national performance standards [23, 37, 38]. A sustainability assessment in bigger cities of the country also showed weak institutional capacity, ineffective governance, water loss and other factors making the water management complex [8]. This has negative implications for the ability of these systems to prepare for climate change, which may put unforeseen stresses on services and will require more effective monitoring of risks. We applied a climate resilience framework [11, 30] to ten utility-managed water supplies in small towns in East Ethiopia to better understand their preparedness for climate change and identified weaknesses in nearly all aspects of service delivery.
Compared to community-managed water supplies in East Ethiopia, we found that small-town water utilities had some strengths [39]. This included the presence of qualified technicians to operate the water supply, an independent board to manage services, relatively better tariff collection and fewer infrastructure risks. However, utility managers receive no support from higher officials on risk management and climate impacts. Emergency support was also not available promptly. This is inconsistent with national policies that require the regional water bureaus to continuously monitor the performance of town water boards and water utilities and provide training and technical support when needed [35].
Seasonal variation in water availability was reported for nearly half of the water supplies, with no utility data available on seasonal changes in yield. Lack of monitoring of water supplies has been associated with reduced functionality during drought in other studies from Ethiopia [40]. The presence of sanitary risks at the water source coupled with the lack of water quality testing by operators indicates another significant vulnerability in these water supplies. In a multi-country paper, Charles et al. (2020) found a correlation between sanitary risks and contamination [41], with a deterioration in water quality after heavy rainfall [42]. Therefore, we recommend that authorities develop protocols for utilities to test water quality and monitor source yield, which can offer public health protection from climate stresses. To reduce the possible health risks associated with extreme events and provide more resilient services, particularly during floods, the district government must also increase its efforts to prevent open defecation and implement flood protection measures around the water sources.
With little to no routine monitoring or trainings on climate risk management, it is impossible for utilities to detect changes in climate patterns and impacts on water resources, or to develop emergency plans. We recommend that Zonal and Woreda offices support utilities in developing protocols for disaster response and include risk management programs like climate resilient Water Safety Plans [43] into training programs for utility managers and operators.
Consistent with previous study [24] we found that several water utilities lack the personnel necessary for water treatment and quality monitoring, even though having a sufficient workforce is one of the requirements for sustainable water delivery [23]. This is inconsistent with the National One WASH program plus which underlines the necessity of proper training, and experience shows that training can increase utilities’ capacity and performance [21, 23]. Utilities also struggle to accurately bill customers and recover operating costs, which inevitably affects their ability to upgrade the system and keep up with growing demand. This poses a significant threat to their capacity to prepare for climate change and adopt the recommendations made here and elsewhere [13].
Based on this study, we also revised the How tough is WASH framework to better reflect the complexity of operating a piped water supply. Specifically, we added metrics on microbial water quality testing by the utility, without which we cannot conclude that water supplies are safe for consumption or draw inferences about current and potential seasonal changes in water quality. In addition, we added metrics on tariff collection and cost recovery, availability of a reliable centralized power supply with backup generators; and modified the community indicator to reflect their role in paying user bills and the need for mechanisms to report service disruptions.
The indicators presented in this study have the potential to be integrated into monitoring frameworks for town water utilities in Ethiopia. Similar to the sustainability check framework [16, 32], the proposed indicators can be used to identify system weaknesses and track incremental progress at service-provider and service-authority levels. The district and sub-district indicators are also conducive to be integrated into system building block analysis tools, used by several WASH sector organizations as part of their district-wide approach [44].
Conclusion
Monitoring climate risks to piped water supplies in small and medium towns is essential to prepare for climate change and keep up with the demands of a growing population. We applied the How Tough is WASH to identify climate risks and system weaknesses of ten small town water utilities in East Ethiopia. Consistent with previous work done in similar settings, we found several weaknesses in service providers and authorities that negatively impact service delivery. These weaknesses are inconsistent with national policies and must be addressed to receive the full public health benefits of access to piped water supplies.
Based on this study, we added indicators to better align the How tough is WASH framework with the Government of Ethiopia’s existing monitoring framework for town water utilities. A tool that applies a climate lens to a sustainability check has the potential to enhance evidence-based decision-making by policymakers in Ethiopia and other sub-Saharan African countries as they improve access to utility-managed piped water supplies.
Supporting information
S1 Appendix. Water sources inspection checklist.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000158.s001
(DOCX)
S2 Appendix. Interview guide for operators, technicians and officials.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pwat.0000158.s002
(DOCX)
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the Pervoli African Research Center (PARC) for its financial support. We extend our gratitude to Ministry of Health, Hygiene and Environmental Health Directorate for its collaboration with Haramaya University from the conception to final dissemination. We would also like to appreciate the data collectors, participants of the study, and local officials for their cooperation during this study.
References
- 1. Howard G, Calow R, Macdonald A, Bartram J. Climate change and water and sanitation: likely impacts and emerging trends for action. Annual review of environment and resources. 2016;41:253–76.
- 2.
GWP U. WASH Climate Resilient Development: Strategic Framework. Global Water Partnership and UNICER; 2017.
- 3. Mukherjee S, Mishra A, Trenberth KE. Climate change and drought: a perspective on drought indices. Current climate change reports. 2018;4:145–63.
- 4. Velasco M, Russo B, Monjo R, Paradinas C, Djordjević S, Evans B, et al. Increased Urban Resilience to Climate Change—Key Outputs from the RESCCUE Project. Sustainability. 2020;12(23):9881.
- 5. Meehl GA, Stocker TF, Collins WD, Friedlingstein P, Gaye T, Gregory JM, et al. Global climate projections. 2007.
- 6.
Bates B, Kundzewicz Z, Wu S. Climate change and water: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Secretariat; 2008.
- 7. Nijhawan A, Howard G. Associations between climate variables and water quality in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review. Water Research. 2022;210:117996. pmid:34959067
- 8. Beker BA, Kansal ML. Complexities of the urban drinking water systems in Ethiopia and possible interventions for sustainability. Environ Dev Sustain. 2023:1–31. pmid:36624733
- 9. Dos Santos S, Adams E, Neville G, Wada Y, De Sherbinin A, Bernhardt EM, et al. Urban growth and water access in sub-Saharan Africa: Progress, challenges, and emerging research directions. Science of the Total Environment. 2017;607:497–508. pmid:28704674
- 10. Kayaga S, Sansom K, Godfrey A, Takahashi I, Van Rooijen D. Towards sustainable urban water services in developing countries: tariffs based on willingness-to-pay studies. Urban Water Journal. 2018;15(10):974–84.
- 11. Vairavamoorthy K, Gorantiwar SD, Pathirana A. Managing urban water supplies in developing countries–Climate change and water scarcity scenarios. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C. 2008;33(5):330–9.
- 12. Dilling L, Daly ME, Kenney DA, Klein R, Miller K, Ray AJ, et al. Drought in urban water systems: Learning lessons for climate adaptive capacity. Climate Risk Management. 2019;23:32–42.
- 13.
World-Bank. Building the Resilience of WSS Utilities to Climate Change and Other Threats: A Road Map. Washington, DC: World Bank; 2018.
- 14.
WBG. Climate Risk Profile: Ethiopia New York: The World Bank Group (WBG); 2021 [Available from: https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/2021-05/15463A-WB_Ethiopia Country Profile-WEB.pdf.
- 15. Tesfaye K, Mamo G, Debela S, Tadesse M, Mekuriaw A, Debele B, et al. First assessment report on agriculture and food security. Working group Ii-climate change impact, vulnerability, adaptation, and mitigation. Ethiopian Panel on Climate Change (EPCC), Ethiopian Academy of Sciences (EAS …; 2015.
- 16.
Bank-World. Economics of adaptation to climate change: Synthesis report. World Bank Washington, DC; 2010.
- 17. Calow R, Ludi E, Tucker J. Achieving water security. Lessons from Research in Water Supply, Sanitation and Hygiene in Ethiopia, Overseas Development Institute (ODI), Londres. 2013.
- 18. MacDonald AM, Bell RA, Kebede S, Azagegn T, Yehualaeshet T, Pichon F, et al. Groundwater and resilience to drought in the Ethiopian highlands. Environmental Research Letters. 2019;14(9):095003.
- 19. Tegenu T. Urbanization in Ethiopia: Study on growth, patterns, functions and alternative policy strategy. 2010.
- 20.
Ozlu M, Alemayehu E, Gebratsadik S. Ethiopia—Urbanization Review: Urban Institutions for a Middle-income Ethiopia (Washington, DC, World Bank Group). 2015.
- 21.
UNICEF. ONEWASH Plus in Urban Areas in Ethiopia-Results from the First Phase 2020.
- 22.
FDRE. ONE WASH National Program. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: FDRE (Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia); 2019.
- 23. Adank M, Godfrey S, Butterworth J, Defere E. Small town water services sustainability checks: development and application in Ethiopia. Water Policy. 2018;20(S1):52–68.
- 24. Adank M, Dimste D, Hailegiorgis B. Sustaining rural water services in Ethiopia: Rural water service levels report. USAID Sustainable WASH Systems Learning Partnership Concept; 2018.
- 25. Beker BA, Kansal ML. Complexities of the urban drinking water systems in Ethiopia and possible interventions for sustainability. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2024;26(2):4629–59.
- 26. Howard G, Charles K, Pond K, Brookshaw A, Hossain R, Bartram J. Securing 2020 vision for 2030: climate change and ensuring resilience in water and sanitation services. Journal of water and climate change. 2010;1(1):2–16.
- 27. Godfrey S, Hailemichael G. Life cycle cost analysis of water supply infrastructure affected by low rainfall in Ethiopia. Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development. 2017;7(4):601–10.
- 28. Özerol G, Dolman N, Bormann H, Bressers H, Lulofs K, Böge M. Urban water management and climate change adaptation: A self-assessment study by seven midsize cities in the North Sea Region. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2020;55:102066.
- 29.
Aid A. Integrating climate resilience with WASH system strengthening-October 2021. 2021.
- 30. Howard G, Nijhawan A, Flint A, Baidya M, Pregnolato M, Ghimire A, et al. The how tough is WASH framework for assessing the climate resilience of water and sanitation. npj Clean Water. 2021;4(1):1–10.
- 31.
Deressa T, Hassan RM, Ringler C. Measuring Ethiopian farmers’ vulnerability to climate change across regional states: Intl Food Policy Res Inst; 2008.
- 32.
Devereux S. Vulnerable livelihoods in Somali region, Ethiopia: Institute of Development Studies Brighton; 2006.
- 33.
CSA, ICFI. Central Statistical Agency [Ethiopia] and ICF International: Ethiopia Demographic and Health Survey Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and Calverton,Maryland, USA: Central Statistical Agency [Ethiopia] and ICF International; 2011 [Available from: https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/fr255/fr255.pdf.
- 34.
Acacia-Water. An assessment towards building resilience through ecosystem restoration in Somali Regional State, Ethiopia. Gouda, The Netherlands: SCRSE Project; 2016 5/7/2023.
- 35.
MoWIE. National Guidelines for Urban Water Supply and Sewerage Services. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Ministry of Water Resources, Irrigation and Electricity (MOWIE); 2013.
- 36.
WHO. Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Vol. 3, Surveillance and control of community supplies. Vol. 3, Vigilancia y control de los abastecimientos de agua a la comunidad. 2nd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1997.
- 37. Adank M, Butterworth J, Godfrey S, Abera M. Looking beyond headline indicators: water and sanitation services in small towns in Ethiopia. Journal of Water Sanitation and Hygiene for Development. 2016;6(3):435–46.
- 38.
UNICEF. Summary Findings from Sustainability Checks for Rural WASH in Ethiopia UNICEF; 2021.
- 39. Nijhawan A, Howard G, Poudel M, Pregnolato M, Eunice Lo YT, Ghimire A, et al. Assessing the Climate Resilience of Community-Managed Water Supplies in Ethiopia and Nepal. Water. 2022;14(8):1293.
- 40. MacAllister DJ, MacDonald A, Kebede S, Godfrey S, Calow R. Comparative performance of rural water supplies during drought. Nature communications. 2020;11(1):1099. pmid:32132535
- 41. Charles KJ, Howard G, Prats EV, Gruber J, Alam S, Alamgir A, et al. Infrastructure alone cannot ensure resilience to weather events in drinking water supplies. Science of the Total Environment. 2022;813:151876. pmid:34826465
- 42. Kostyla C, Bain R, Cronk R, Bartram J. Seasonal variation of fecal contamination in drinking water sources in developing countries: a systematic review. Science of the Total Environment. 2015;514:333–43. pmid:25676921
- 43.
Organization WH. Climate-resilient water safety plans: managing health risks associated with climate variability and change. 2017. Report No.: 9241512792.
- 44. Huston A, Moriarty P. Understanding the WASH system and its building blocks. Understanding the WASH system and its building blocks. 2018.