Characteristics of Households - Childinfo.org

In its 2008 report 12 , the JMP developed a new way ofpresenting the access figures, by disaggregating andrefining the data on drinking-water and sanitationand reflecting them in “ladder” format. This ladderallows a disaggregated analysis of trends in a three rungladder for drinking-water and a four-rung ladder forsanitation. For sanitation, this gives an understandingof the proportion of the population with no sanitationfacilities at all, of those reliant on technologies definedby JMP as “unimproved,” of those sharing sanitationfacilities of otherwise acceptable technology, and thoseusing “improved” sanitation facilities. Table WS.8ranks household population by drinking water andsanitation ladders. The table also shows the percentageof household members using improved sources ofdrinking water and sanitary means of excreta disposal.In Serbia, 100 percent of the population use improveddrinking water, 98 percent use improved sanitationand 97 percent use both improved drinking water andimproved sanitation.Table WS.8: Drinking water and sanitation ladders, Serbia, 2010Percentage of household population by drinking water and sanitation laddersImproved drinkingwater 1Piped intodwelling,plot oryardOtherimprovedUnimproveddrinkingwaterPercentage of household population using:TotalImprovedsanitation 2SharedimprovedfacilitiesUnimproved sanitationUnimprovedfacilitiesOpendefecationTotalImproveddrinkingwatersources andimprovedsanitationNumber ofhouseholdmembersRegionBelgrade 94.6 4.8 .6 100.0 98.3 1.1 .6 .0 100.0 97.7 4193Vojvodina 97.5 2.1 .5 100.0 99.3 .5 .2 .0 100.0 98.9 5407Sumadija andWestern Serbia85.4 14.1 .5 100.0 95.9 .4 3.7 .0 100.0 95.4 5969Southern andEastern Serbia86.8 12.9 .3 100.0 98.1 .5 1.3 .1 100.0 97.9 5305AreaUrban 98.4 1.4 .2 100.0 99.0 .7 .2 .0 100.0 98.9 11501Rural 81.3 17.9 .8 100.0 96.4 .4 3.2 .0 100.0 95.6 9373Education of household headPrimary 82.8 16.4 .8 100.0 95.5 1.0 3.4 .1 100.0 94.7 6669Secondary 93.5 6.1 .4 100.0 98.8 .4 .8 .0 100.0 98.4 9870Higher 97.8 2.2 .1 100.0 99.8 .2 .1 .0 100.0 99.7 3913Wealth index quintilePoorest 77.4 21.0 1.6 100.0 92.6 2.0 5.1 .2 100.0 91.1 4175Second 84.9 14.9 .2 100.0 97.5 .1 2.4 .0 100.0 97.3 4178Middle 93.4 6.4 .2 100.0 99.7 .2 .1 .0 100.0 99.5 4173Fourth 98.8 1.2 .0 100.0 99.5 .4 .1 .0 100.0 99.5 4173Richest 99.1 .6 .2 100.0 99.8 .1 .1 .0 100.0 99.6 4175Total 90.7 8.8 .5 100.0 97.8 .6 1.6 .0 100.0 97.4 208741MICS indicator 4.1; MDG indicator 7.82MICS indicator 4.3; MDG indicator 7.912WHO/UNICEF JMP (2008), MDG assessment report — http://www.wssinfo.org/download?id_document=1279MONITORING THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN 103