Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Skip to main content

Every three years, SWA produces a global report to analyze how partners are working towards a culture of mutual accountability for ensuring universal access to water, sanitation and hygiene for all, always and everywhere. This inaugural report, covering the first three years of the SWA Mutual Accountability Mechanism – the multi-stakeholder cycle of defining priorities, making commitments, monitoring progress, and renewing collaborative action – presents the mechanism as a pathway towards delivering on SWA’s strategic objectives, and ultimately, realizing the human rights to water and sanitation.

The Mutual Accountability Mechanism Global Report outlines the critical importance of accountability for delivering the Sustainable Development Goals agenda. It also describes the mechanism’s evolution, and how it is designed to work – it is highly adaptable and should be used in a way that adds value to global and national ongoing processes.

The report discusses how partners have engaged with SWA’s Mutual Accountability Mechanism so far, and includes a look at a selection of country experiences, as well as the breadth and depth of its potential to engage stakeholders in the sector. It also identifies some of the challenges that have hampered efforts and sets out ambitions for the Mutual Accountability Mechanism over the next three years.

The Mutual Accountability Mechanism is a tool to help partners understand each other’s contributions and hold each other accountable to the commitments they make.

SWA views mutual accountability as a disciplined way to realize the human rights to water and sanitation together and more quickly: an opportunity for plans to meet, and collaborative action to start.

Mutual accountability for action towards the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals hinges on inclusive multi-stakeholder platforms.

If ingrained as a common framework that offers all stakeholders a seat at the table, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism can function as a tool to catalyze a culture of accountability and collective action to achieve the water- and sanitation-related SDGs targets.

The importance of mutual accountability

Accountability is central to SWA’s efforts. It is the willingness to accept responsibility for one's actions and to account for it to others. It is a requirement for progress and a human rights principle. SWA focuses on a practical concept of accountability. It encourages governments and all stakeholders to articulate a shared vision for a country’s water, sanitation and hygiene sector; identify roles and responsibilities in achieving it; commit to action, and hold each other to account. It is this focus on a shared vision and collaboration which fosters mutual accountability.

Experiences from partner countries

The report includes a selection of country experiences from the first three years of implementing the Mutual Accountability Mechanism, between 2018 and 2021. It examines the ‘pioneer countries’ which agreed to consider how to use the mechanism and promote a culture of mutual accountability in the water, sanitation and hygiene sector. It then explores a selection of inspirational stories from nine countries from across the globe: Bangladesh, Central African Republic, Honduras, Kenya, Lao PDR, Malawi, Mali, Paraguay and the State of Palestine. 

Challenges to be overcome

The report identifies some of the challenges that have hampered efforts. Weak multi-stakeholder platforms, the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in government and institutions have made it difficult, at times, to build momentum for political leadership. The report reiterates how engaging the right people, at the right time, with the right message is critical to the success of any effort to boost mutual accountability.

Ambitions for the next three years 

In order to overcome the challenges and help partners take advantage of the full potential of the mechanism, the SWA partnership should use the suggested actions over the next three years to guide its work:

  • Action 1: Strengthen multi-stakeholder platforms – mutual accountability for action towards the achievement of the SDGs hinges on inclusive multi-stakeholder processes.
  • Action 2: Improve global commitments and engagement – potential can be further realized when commitments made at the national level are combined and amplified by commitments from international organizations, donors, financing bodies and multi-lateral agencies.
  • Action 3: Create ‘accountability moments’ – by organizing sessions dedicated to the discussion of commitments during future high-level engagements.

FACTS

There has been a steady rise in the number of commitments made under the Mutual Accountability Mechanism in its first three years. By July 2021, 346 commitments had been tabled by over 140 partners across all constituencies, from every region across the globe, including by 50 national governments.

Overall, 83% of commitments made to date are related to improving sector coordination, including the development of new national plans and strategies, monitoring and evaluation, and financing-related targets.

12% of commitments were reported as having been fully achieved: from Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali, Tanzania, and global commitments from FANSA, SIWI and UNC. Other 25% of commitments are close to being fully achieved.

As of October 2021, 88 commitments had been reported on. The civil society constituency is leading this step of the Mutual Accountability Mechanism process, having submitted 43 reports.

CASE STUDIES

Malawi

The Mutual Accountability Mechanism as a springboard for multi-stakeholder action

Kenya

The Mutual Accountability as a tool for coordination

Bangladesh

Increasing prioritization and funding

Lao PDR

Aligned commitments from all constituencies

Paraguay

Using the Mutual Accountability Mechanism to increase strategic engagement

Honduras

More inclusive national plans

State of Palestine

The potential for long-term multi-stakeholder planning and action

Mali

Increasing sector stability by improving strategic dialogue

The Central African Republic

Sector progress in instability

Malawi

In Malawi, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism process has helped to increase engagement and improve joint responsibility in the water, sanitation and hygiene sector – and beyond. Malawi has always sought to identify areas for process improvement, and the Mutual Accountability Mechanism has helped to develop a response to this ambition, adjusting and improving existing review and coordination platforms so that they now work better for the sector.

The Mutual Accountability Mechanism has increased collaboration both inside and outside the sector, which has had a significant impact on sector resilience and preparedness.

Malawi developed its Mutual Accountability Mechanism commitments and agreed on them as part of the country’s Joint Sector Review (JSR) process. While Malawi’s JSRs had always been seen as important, a WaterAid study in 20204 identified that they nevertheless lacked a clear focus on action and responsibilities to move beyond being just an annual reporting event. The introduction of setting commitments as part of the Mutual Accountability Mechanism has helped the JSR process to evolve. Now, sector priorities and commitments are set at the JSR, which helps to keep stakeholders focused on these objectives through the year. Building on the country’s JSRs, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism process has proved to be an effective way to facilitate collective action, acting as a coordination mechanism.

The Mutual Accountability Mechanism process has also benefited conversations beyond the water, sanitation and hygiene sector. There has been increased collaboration and engagement, bringing in more actors to define a clearer and common purpose. For example, specific support was provided by the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council to help engage civil society organizations representing among other groups, people living with disabilities, and prisoners, and involving the health, education and justice sectors in water and sanitation sector dialogues for the first time. These efforts were part of the civil society constituency’s commitments to ‘mobilize its members to develop and implement action plan towards addressing the needs of the people left behind after Open Defecation Free’ and to identify approaches to ‘facilitate increased access to basic sanitation, in poorest and hardest to reach areas and marginalized groups.

Kenya

The Mutual Accountability Mechanism is designed to be flexible and adaptable, allowing national partners to promote mutual accountability in a way that contributes the most to any given context. In a process co-chaired by the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Water and Sanitation, the Government of Kenya is using the mechanism as a coordination tool for the promotion of collaborative action and mutual accountability. The Government recently set national priorities through a multi-stakeholder consultation, which led to the development of ‘country commitments’. After these five overarching commitments were defined, all constituencies were invited to rally behind them, submitting supporting commitments of their own. All commitments were presented to the partnership simultaneously in July 2021 and represent a clear and trackable ‘to do list’, containing 57 aligned commitments that will help the Government and its partners work together until the target year of 2022. These commitments may be read on page 15. According to the actors involved, important lessons learned are that for this process to be successful, three key elements are required: government leadership; supportive constituency leads that are willing to drive the process of making commitments and their subsequent follow-up; and inclusivity. “Accountability processes should include a wide array of stakeholders to ensure marginalized and excluded groups are equally involved and that their voices are heard”, observed Tobias Omufwoko of WASH Alliance Kenya. Kenya’s approach has meant that the country is now one of the few SWA partner countries with commitments tabled by all constituencies. The Government and the other stakeholders now aim to bring this national-level process to counties, replicating the Mutual Accountability Mechanism at a local level.

Bangladesh

In Bangladesh, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism is inspiring strategic sector conversations and advocacy for water, sanitation and hygiene. These discussions have facilitated collaboration and action in a context of urgent development and humanitarian needs, and where coordinated efforts are critical to ensuring that services reach everyone.

The process of setting commitments for the Mutual Accountability Mechanism requires collectively identifying priorities for the sector and developing a shared sense of accountability to achieve them. In Bangladesh, this process has provided a clear and common foundation for sector discussions. For civil society organizations in particular, the process has provided a seat at the table to enable conversations with decision-makers. It has also meant that such conversations can be framed consistently around agreed priorities, moving beyond general requests to increase budgets to more strategic discussions – for example, on how to improve services for hard-to-reach communities and excluded groups. More broadly, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism has also helped to create a stronger sense of continuity for the sector.

The Mutual Accountability Mechanism helps conversations to be framed consistently around agreed priorities, moving beyond general requests to more strategic and longer-term discussions.

Hasin Jahan, of WaterAid Bangladesh, suggests that one of the biggest added values of the Mutual Accountability Mechanism process has been that “conceptual ideas and processes surrounding accountability are increasingly accepted as a necessity”. Additionally, Zobair Hasan, of the ‘Network of Networks’, believes that the mechanism has “helped to operationalize and demystify accountability” from an abstract concept, sometimes viewed with suspicion, to a tool for advocacy that improves outcomes. The mechanism, he explains, has “provided focus and a vehicle for accountability”. The Government, for instance, now gives time and space to discuss shared responsibilities and ambitions, because they can see how it helps to keep all stakeholders on track towards agreed sector-wide goals.

The Mutual Accountability Mechanism process in Bangladesh has fostered a strong focus on collective goals and outcomes. This improved coordination has enriched the enabling environment so that progress can be visualized in terms of collective ambitions, not just the sum of individual projects. And once governments have a sense of this potential – a broad coalition of actors helping to deliver water and sanitation for all – the sector can attract increased political prioritization.

Ultimately, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism has played a significant role in elevating the relevance of the sector in Bangladesh. In line with its commitment to ‘increase Government’s yearly budget by US$ 250 million for the water sanitation and hygiene sector, reducing the budget gap by 50% in each fiscal year’, the Government has greatly surpassed this goal and increased the budget by 75 percent, raising it from approximately US$ 795 million in 2018-2019 to US$ 1.4 billion in 2021-2022

Lao PDR

In Lao PDR, the SWA Finance Minister’s Meetings of 2020 galvanized sector discussions, offering an opportunity for increased multi-stakeholder dialogue on sector priorities. As part of these discussions, the Government, through the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Public Works and Transport, drafted and submitted commitments under the Mutual Accountability Mechanism. These focused on ending open defecation nationwide, as well as establishing a multi-stakeholder committee for the sector and a dedicated national fund for the water, sanitation and hygiene. Stakeholders engaged in those conversations were able to identify areas where they could support the Government of Lao PDR on the commitments made under the mechanism. Importantly, these commitments were based on their own roles, areas of expertise and organizational priorities and were designed to feed into and support the government’s core commitments, as the agreed strategic priorities for the sector.

Paraguay

In Paraguay, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism has improved engagement between stakeholders, and provided for a shared understanding of the needs of the water and sanitation sector. For the Government, the mechanism has been a means to set out its key sector priorities and to form a basis for conversations with other sector actors. The Mutual Accountability Mechanism has also strengthened the structures within which to work, building momentum and raising visibility for Paraguay’s ambitions to achieve significant increases in levels of water and sanitation coverage. Both the Government and key civil society partners feel that the Mutual Accountability Mechanism provides an opportunity to talk and think at the sector level, rather than purely organizationally or institutionally.

Both the Government and key civil society partners in the sector feel that the Mutual Accountability Mechanism provides an opportunity to talk and think at the sector level, rather than purely organizationally or institutionally.

Since starting to engage partners through the Mutual Accountability Mechanism in 2018, the Government has been able to reach a broader and increasingly diverse range of stakeholders. An initial review of Mutual Accountability Mechanism commitments in 2019 saw the process bring in more actors and inputs, broadening the conversation to include perspectives and expertise from academia, the private sector, and civil society. Although COVID-19 has disrupted this process, there is a strong will to build the broadest possible collaboration to deliver the commitments. In turn, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism is increasingly being seen as a platform to develop, discuss and deliver Paraguay’s vision for the sector – even helping stakeholders to keep track of sector priorities when the pandemic hit. The Mutual Accountability Mechanism process has helped to create a common vision and voice for the sector. It has allowed for greater engagement between the government and civil society by enabling the Government’s Water and Sanitation Directorate (DAPSAN), the civil society organization Environment and Social Research Center (CEAMSO) and other stakeholders to build the broad alliances required to make this vision a reality. For Claudia Zapattini of CEAMSO, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism has helped civil society organizations get a ‘seat at the table’ for important sector discussions. The mechanism has also helped DAPSAN to engage the Ministry of Finance to embed a key idea: that the water, sanitation and hygiene sector is not simply an expenditure, but a critical investment that will pay socio-economic dividends in the future.

The revision of the National Drinking Water and Sanitation Plans is an example of how multistakeholder dialogues have delivered tangible improvements to the sector. “The Mutual Accountability Mechanism provided a clarity that has made it easier to involve and consult other actors as part of the process”, explained Mr Hugo of DAPSAN. Such consultations have strengthened the sector’s ability to develop increasingly multi-faceted national strategies; the updated national plan will tackle urgent, interconnected issues such as climate change and gender inequality, and aims to provide services to vulnerable groups and hard-to-reach communities.

Ultimately, Paraguay’s Mutual Accountability Mechanism commitments are perceived as a clear way to outline priorities to achieve SDG 6. The existence of shared goals has provided focus, a visible structure and increased political visibility for the sector. The clearer sense of priorities and strategy has helped DAPSAN, CEAMSO, UNICEF and other actors to build what Claudia Zapattini of CEAMSO describes as a “working synergy” to coalesce around. The experience of Paraguay shows how the Mutual Accountability Mechanism can provide a structure, increased visibility and most importantly, a sense of shared purpose, consistency, and clear responsibilities to the sector.

Honduras

In Honduras, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism has played a key role in bringing the sector together to work on improving water, sanitation and hygiene. For example, a key objective of the Government is to update their National Drinking Water and Sanitation Plan (Plan Nacional de Agua y Saneamiento, or PLANASA), in order to give it the best chance of achieving the ambitions of the SDGs. The Mutual Accountability Mechanism has provided an opportunity for the Government to increase joint work on that plan, enriching it with the perspectives of a wider variety of stakeholders. The insights of civil society organizations, for example, have added their experience and expertise in areas such as reaching rural and other vulnerable communities. Such inputs have been invaluable to the Government. The Mutual Accountability Mechanism has contributed by bringing additional depth to the National Plan, while also improving stakeholders’ understanding of sector priorities, and how they can contribute to achieving them.

State of Palestine

One of the strengths of the Mutual Accountability Mechanism is that it can be adapted to fit even the most complex contexts. While the mechanism is not yet an established element of State of Palestine’s sector, its defining principles can help stakeholders picture how the sector might progress beyond a purely humanitarian response. These principles – in particular those of setting out clear sector priorities and defining multi-stakeholder responsibilities – are the key.

The water, sanitation and hygiene sector in Palestine is currently coordinated, as it is in many other SWA partner countries, by the humanitarian Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) Cluster. The WASH Cluster is led by UNICEF and focuses on the urgent humanitarian needs of people in Palestine, as opposed to the Mutual Accountability Mechanism’s typical government-led, longer-term development focus. Still, the WASH Cluster model shares characteristics with the mechanism, such as convening a wide range of stakeholders to identify common challenges, plans and priorities. The Mutual Accountability Mechanism can build on these shared characteristics since it is designed to help set a focus on the longer-term development goals, which is something that can help ensure continuity of service provision beyond the phases of an emergency response. In Palestine, the Government’s commitments tabled under the Mutual Accountability Mechanism are seen as a potential way to frame a longer-term development conversation for the sector. Led by the Government through the Palestinian Water Authority, such conversations could build on existing work and begin to include, for example, wider stakeholders, such as local non-governmental organizations. This could help maintain focus beyond the immediate humanitarian emergency and, ultimately, work towards the achievement of SDG 6.

The Mutual Accountability Mechanism can help to establish a formal focus on the longer-term development goals of water, sanitation and hygiene sector, to ensure continuity of service provision beyond the phases of an emergency response.

In Palestine, the Government’s commitments tabled under the Mutual Accountability Mechanism are seen as a potential way to frame a longer-term development conversation for the sector. Led by the Government through the Palestinian Water Authority, such conversations could build on existing work and begin to include, for example, wider stakeholders, such as local non-governmental organizations. This could help maintain focus beyond the immediate humanitarian emergency and, ultimately, work towards the achievement of SDG 6.

Viewed in this way, the mechanism can be seen as a useful tool that could help promote the nexus between development and humanitarian approaches in unstable contexts, in the face of political upheaval or protracted conflict. The Palestinian Water Authority also suggests that an effective mechanism focused on accountability can help deliver on some crucial principles of aid effectiveness and coordination. Namely, country ownership over programmes; alignment between donor funding and country priorities; harmonization of donor activities to avoid duplication and fragmentation of efforts; transparency and accountability; and providing predictable, long-term funding.

In any context, actors can use the Mutual Accountability Mechanism to provide a clearer sense of direction for the sector and help to clarify their role in delivering that vision with improved efficiency and less overlap. The mechanism is a flexible tool, and in humanitarian contexts, it can help ensure there is a balance between being focused on the immediate, life-saving needs of the people and also looking ahead at how the system can be improved to be more resilient to such shocks and crises.

Mali

Mali is a particularly engaged SWA partner country and, as a ‘pioneer country’, helped SWA ‘test’ the Mutual Accountability Mechanism. This is set against backdrop of a challenging political context and much upheaval in the past decade. Despite this, the sector has progressively strengthened its foundations, with much of this built around the SWA Framework and the Mutual Accountability Mechanism process. This has helped sector actors to create stable spaces and structures for dialogue, even in the midst of uncertainty.

The Mali water, sanitation and hygiene sector has a reasonably strong Joint Sector Review (JSR) process, but it is often very much viewed and used as a reporting forum. Progress is reviewed, but as in many countries, the dialogue during the JSR often remained at a high, strategic level, with few specific actions agreed on. Mali’s sector has responded by introducing an annual cadre de concertation EAH (or ‘water, sanitation and hygiene consultation framework’), which successfully fills this gap. The activity of the cadre has been structured around SWA principles for several years, with the Mutual Accountability Mechanism providing the central focus since 2019. The annual meeting focuses on a shared vision for the sector, and how each actor can contribute to achieving it. The cadre de concertation is attended by representatives from across the sector, including actors from all the SWA constituencies, and has strong ministerial support.

The commitments made under the Mutual Accountability Mechanism are at the centre of the Malian sector’s consciousness. The culture of mutual accountability that SWA  has helped to nurture is embraced very strongly across the sector. 

Mali has also put an ‘SWA Committee’ in place comprising key sector actors, which has kept a consistent focus on the Mutual Accountability Mechanism commitments. It has also driven and supported other strategic dialogues, for example on sector financing and the climate crisis. The committee has been a stabilizing influence for the sector, helping to absorb shocks and uncertainties related to the challenging political situation in the country. This has kept commitments at the centre of the sector’s consciousness. The culture of mutual accountability that these spaces have helped to nurture is warmly embraced across the sector. Multi-constituency engagement in the country is one of the strongest in the SWA partnership: Mali has focal points for all constituencies, and each constituency has made its own commitments in support of the overarching commitments made by the Government. These commitments have identified strategic priorities and offered a way of engaging with actors to address them. The mechanism has given a sense of urgency and focus to the sector, for example on the updating of national strategies and plans. Mali’s Ministry of Finance, for example, had indicated that increased funding was only likely with a clearer, harmonized sectoral strategy. The Mutual Accountability Mechanism provided the space to develop that strategy, formalizing actors’ commitments and focus so that sector plans were developed much earlier than would otherwise have happened.

The core Mutual Accountability Mechanism commitments have now led to the creation of sector plans and programmes developed through multistakeholder engagement and articulating a shared vision for the sector. Most notably they are enshrined in the Cadre Stratégique pour la Relance Economique et le Développement Durable, or ‘CREDD’ – Mali’s strategic framework for economic recovery and sustainable development.

Even in contexts where sector structures are considered to be strong, the Malian experience shows how the Mutual Accountability Mechanism can help them to evolve. It has provided the basis to lift the strategic conversations and translate them into action and shared responsibilities, ultimately making the sector stronger and more resilient to political upheaval, financial uncertainty and other shocks in the future.

The Central African Republic

In the Central African Republic, the Mutual Accountability Mechanism has helped stakeholders to position and keep the water, sanitation and hygiene sector as a high government priority, and to mobilize resources. In 2019, the Government developed its Mutual Accountability Mechanism commitments to align with national objectives outlined in the Plan du Relèvement et la Consolidation de la Paix (‘Plan for Recovery and Peacebuilding’). They commit the Government to: providing access to services for an additional 500,000 people; creating a dedicated budget line for sanitation and hygiene; and revising national plans for the sector to better align them with the SDGs. With such clear priorities set, UNICEF, for example, has been better able to offer specific support to the Government to help realize its ambitions, and monitor progress on commitments made. Significant progress has been made on these national commitments, which is even more impressive given the instability arising from the political situation. By October 2020, a new national water policy had been drafted and technically validated; an additional 516,000 persons had access to services (191,000 to drinking water and 325,000 to basic sanitation); and details of dedicated budget lines for sanitation and hygiene had been drafted.

Mutual Accountability Mechanism Global Report 2021