OR/16/044 Literature review

Wilson P, Bonsor H C, MacDonald A M, Whaley L, Carter R C, Casey V. 2016. UPGRO Hidden Crisis Research consortium: initial project approach for assessing rural water supply functionality and levels of performance. British Geological Survey (BGS) Open Report, OR/16/044.

An extensive literature review was undertaken to: (1) appreciate how functionality is defined by previous surveys, with a view to informing the interpretation of results from these surveys; and, (2) to help inform a better understanding of what is a functioning HPB, and the indicators required to assess this.

Data review process

Over 111 studies were reviewed: more than 75 of these were unpublished grey literature, with only 24 within published peer reviewed literature. A further 7 existing regional‐scale functionality database studies were reviewed from [WaterAid] WASH programmes. Most of the studies (90) were published since 2008, highlighting the general growing research interest in understanding the sustainability and functionality of water supplies.

The studies included within the review were identified by two methods. Published studies and publicly available grey literature were identified from a series of Boolean internet searches. Over 85% of the studies were identified and sourced by this method. The remaining studies and existing national databases on functionality were identified and collated through collaboration with regional project partners.

All 111 studies, including the quantitative datasets, were indexed, georeferenced and stored in an Access database. GIS (Arc 10.1) was used to spatially interrogate the different types of information held within the database. The studies were systematically reviewed to examine for each study: Is the functionality of water points explicitly defined? Is there one widely accepted definition or are different ones used? If different ones are used, are there any commonalities between them? What were the lessons or recommendations that we can learn from? Based on the information provided to these questions a value rank was applied to each study. Key criteria used to assign this value were: (1) the clarity of the definition of functionality; (2) sufficient methodological description of any data review or survey; (3) a range of indicators of functionality were examined; (4) the geographical scope of the data collation or review; and (5) the sample size of functionality data collated or reviewed. Studies which only partially satisfied these criteria were ranked to be of lower value. Of the 117 studies and data reviewed a third were classed as high value, whilst over a third did not include a clear definition of functionality or methods.

The final reports from three major recent research projects — WASHCost, Triple S and Value For Money — WASH (VFM–WASH) — were reviewed in greater detail. These projects have examined different aspects underlying water point functionality, and how more sustainable services could be delivered, in great depth (Triple‐S 2009, Cross et al. 2013, Ross 2015).

Appendix 1 provides a full reference list of the literature review.