THE PHILIPPINE WOMENS UNIVERSITY HZB SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL

RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY

Water and Sanitation

A short paper on Human Waste Management
Patrick C. Agonias, Jan Emil Langomez, Ian Chryzl Telan, Dennis Manimbo

Table of Contents
This report on Water and Sanitation is to be submitted to Prof. Lilia G. Casanova in partial
fulfillment to the course: Philippine Economic and Social Development Issues of the MAForeign Service Programme, SY 2016-2017.

Introduction to the Topic and its Significance...............................................................................2

Issue and Scope of the Report....................................................................................................2
Background of the Topic.............................................................................................................. 3
Pre-modern Sanitation Management........................................................................................3
Modern Sewerage and Sanitation Management......................................................................4
Sectors Involved on Sanitation Management...........................................................................4
Policies on Sanitation Management.........................................................................................5
Resources and Funding........................................................................................................... 6
Implementation and Current Performance...................................................................................8
Joint Monitoring Report of WHO and UNICEF.........................................................................9
Recommendations of Development Agencies............................................................................10
Conclusion................................................................................................................................. 11
Bibliography............................................................................................................................... 12

List of Tables and Figures

Table 1: Compilation of Relevant Laws, Policies and Guidelines on Sanitation in the Philippines5
Table 2: Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs for Sanitation...............................................7

Figure 1: Sector Financing: Required, Anticipated (2012-2014) and Recent Expenditures, (20092011)............................................................................................................................................ 6
Figure 3: Rural and Urban Sanitation Investment Requirements.................................................7
Figure 4: Urban Wastewater and Septage Flow...........................................................................8
Figure 5: Sanitation Coverage (Rural and Urban)......................................................................10

Introduction to the Topic and its Significance

Page 1 of 14

Study has shown that millions of people in developing countries die due to a lack of drinking
water and proper sanitation services (WS&S). Millions also suffer various diseases because of
the lack of these basic needs. Populations in the lower class of society are often the most
affected, and are aggravated because of poverty (Loughborough University, undated).
Economic growth and development are also factors in WS&S because it also raises
environmental issues such as water resources and food security. Because of its critical
interconnection with other issues, the UN included WS&S in its Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs)1. According to a joint report of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United
Nations Emergency Childrens Fund (UNICEF), the globe faced a huge disparity between 1990
and 2015 in achieving its target2. According to the definition of the UN, Drinking Water is used
for domestic purposes, drinking, cooking, and personal hygiene whilst Basic Sanitation is the
lowest-cost technology ensuring hygienic excreta and sullage disposal and a clean and
healthful living environment both at home and in the neighborhood of users (World Health
Organization, 2016).
WS&S is known as a basic human right, even though it is not explicitly stated in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (1966)3. The issue of WS&S became more pronounced in the development
community during the second half of the twentieth century. As a result, more treaties were
adopted with explicit reference to adequate WS&S such as, but not limited to: the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (1979), the Convention on the
Rights of the Child (1989), and Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2007).
The Committee for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) in 2002 adopted General
Comment No. 15 on the right to water4. The Committee clarified the content of the right which
will also be used to monitor the compliance of State parties. The right was affirmed by other
bodies of the UN such as the General Assembly (July, 2010) and the Human Rights Council
(September, 2010). Therefore, States are obligated to ensure that their legal framework and
institutions are in place to provide water and sanitation to its population, specifically those
vulnerable in the society5.
Issue and Scope of the Report
1 MDG Goal 7, target number 3: Halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water
and basic sanitation. United Nations. (2013). Millenium Development Goals: Background. Retrieved June 3, 2016, from United
Nations: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/bkgd.shtml

2 Loughborough University. (undated). Introduction to Water and Sanitation Projects. Retrieved May 22, 2016, from Loughborough
University: http://www.lboro.ac.uk/well/resources/Publications/guidance-manual/chapter-1.pdf

3 de Albuquerque, C. (undated). On the Right Track: Good practices in realising the rights to water and sanitation. New York: United
Nations.

4 United Nations Economic and Social Council. (2002). General Comment No. 15. New York: Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights.

5 de Albuquerque, C. (undated). On the Right Track: Good practices in realising the rights to water and sanitation. New York: United
Nations.

Page 2 of 14

The Asian Development Banks (ADB) assessment of the Philippines in 2013 identified that the
main issue on sanitation is the lack of sanitation facilities. The issue has resulted in poor
health conditions of the population and environmental degradation. ADB also identified five
causes: (a) lack of policies, effective governance, and regulation; (b) low awareness and
political will for improving sanitation; (c) inadequate funds to finance sanitation infrastructure;
uncertainties about willingness to pay; (d) lack of sanitation capacity; (e) sanitation crisis in
emergency situations. The report will only discuss on sanitation management of human wastes.
One of the critical gaps identified is a national sanitation policy such as a policy on sanitation
regulation (Asian Development Bank, 2013). Existing laws and standards on sanitation needs to
be updated. It has been observed by experts that current laws and standards remain vague
which further complicates implementationespecially when it is on the local level. Limited
awareness and political will of the general public has resulted in small budgets for local
sanitation programs and projects, lack of feasible projects, and poor advocacy campaigns6. This
is also because LGUs themselves are not able to regularly provide updated information for
monitoring purposes, thus not being able to report on the costs and benefits of sanitation to the
public. The reports of the World Bank (2003) and the Asian Development Bank (2013) stated
that there have been few investments in proper sewage collection and treatment. In addition,
the benefits of sanitation are not being broadly appreciated (Asian Development Bank, 2013),
due to the fact that its effects are not immediately felt by beneficiaries. Moreover, willingness of
beneficiaries to pay depends on the current strategies on cost recovery and tariff collection of
these service-providing institutions. Lack of capacity is identified as a critical factor in hampering
service delivery. The reports found that due to the lack of a separate sanitation agency,
personnel from different agencies handle both water and sanitation. Though this current
arrangement has its advantages such as multidisciplinary approaches in resolving issues,
however, the disadvantage is that most personnel lack the required skills and expertise.
Educational institutions pointed out that enrollment have been declining on courses related to
sanitation. Lastly, in times of emergencies in times of natural disasters or armed conflict one of
the primary concerns of the government is sanitation to evacuees. Sanitation as well as hygiene
promotion are critical areas to ensure the wellness of survivors of these emergencies,
particularly during the relief and rehabilitation phases. Reports from international organizations
and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) found that sanitation facilities in most evacuation
centers are inadequate (i.e. toilet to population ratio was 1:116 as opposed to the ideal ratio of
1:20). Though LGUs and international organizations, and NGOs have assisted communities in
disaster preparedness, extreme weathers are expected to be more common because of climate
change. The reported stated that the country lacks research and development of sanitation and
sewerage technology.
Background of the Topic
Pre-modern Sanitation Management
During Spanish colonial rule, most barrios relied on wells and natural water resources such as
rivers for their access to clean water. Sewage systems were nonexistent, and no proper forms
of waste management were utilized by the local governments back then (de Lemps, 2001)In
Intramuros (Old Manila) case, physicians were already observing the growing pollution in the
esteros near Pasig River.
6 Asian Development Bank. (2013). Philippines Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Assessment, Strategy, and Road Map.
Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank.

Page 3 of 14

While no formal data or study existed back then to measure the exact level of pollution among
Manilas esteros, such information is corroborated by observing the outbreaks of cholera
epidemics that ravaged Intramuros and nearby barrios between 1820 and 1890. This indicates
the extent of pollution thats already prevalent among the esteros that flow out to Pasig River; as
such diseases are known to thrive in areas containing several natural and man-made wastes
(de Lemps, 2001)The data and observations of the countrys water environment before proper
studies were conducted are mostly sourced from Physicians. This is because their line of work
healthentails them to check up on residents who suffer from several cholera outbreaks, in
which most diagnoses are rooted on the consumption of stank water. Due to several outbreaks
of cholera that transpired within and near the areas of Intramuros, it is also the physicians who
usually alarm the colonial government to take action on the stagnant waters spreading among
the esteros.
Modern Sewerage and Sanitation Management
The countrys sewage and sanitation sector was modernized during the early 1970s. This was
the year when the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) were established
and the government lessened its control on these services (World Bank, 2003). Its primary
mandate was to provide services in Metro Manila and its outlying areas, while the management
of provincial and municipal water and sewage systems was given back to LGUs. In 1973, the
Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) was established by local communities. Their primary
concern is on water supply, but only a few are involved with regard to sanitation. By the 1990s,
the MWSS was struggling to attract investments in order to expand service since Metro Manila
has undergone rapid development. As such, in 1997, MWSS entered into a 25-year concession
contracts with two private consortia 7 in order to assist in providing these services. According to
the World Bank (2003), these consortia mainly focused on water supply, but with little progress
in sanitation. Water and sanitation in the rural parts of the country have been handed over to
LGUs, which in its state at the time is in poor condition8.
According to a report of the World Bank (2003), urban sewage and sanitation is not a priority of
LGUs. This is further evident in the provinces and rural areas where public sanitation is almost
non-existent. There are few existing structures, but these are mostly outdated and were created
during the American occupation in the late 1920s. The report also noted that the septic tanks
being used are not in par with national regulations and are seldom desludged. In addition the
report stated that a comprehensive sewerage and water treatment plan is lacking. Because of
this, the urban and rural poor resort to unsanitary toilets or defecate in the open9.
From the year 2000 until 2010, Government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) on
water and sanitation has been hit financially, particularly Maynilad Water Services, Inc. which
went bankrupt in 2003. During this time, services were reduced whilst tariffs increased.
7 These are Maynilad Water Services Inc. and Manila Water Company, Inc. World Bank. (2003). Urban Sewerage and Sanitation:
Lessons learned from case studies in the Philippines. Makati City: World Bank.

8 Ibid
9 World Bank. (2015). Water Supply and Sanitation in the Philippines: Turning Finance into Services for the Future. Taguig City:
World Bank.

Page 4 of 14

Fortunately, Manila Water Services, Inc. was able to recover financially by 1999. During the
administration of Benigno Aquino III, a Bottom-Up Budgeting (BUB) was implemented in order to
prioritize the needs of the communities at the grassroots level. Further, the process of budgeting
was undertaken because it would also assist the country in attaining its MDG goals on water
and sanitation by 2015.
Sectors Involved on Sanitation Management10
The National Economic Development Agency (NEDA) is the agency in charge for policy
formulation and planning on sanitation. NEDA also works with other agencies such as the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), ensures that these sanitation
management and project implementations would lead to a healthy environment to the general
public. The National Housing Authority (NHA) meanwhile ensures that shelters have the proper
sewerage and sanitation infrastructures in place. One of the responsibilities of the Metro Manila
Development Authoritys (MMDA) is health and sanitation 11 this includes the formulation and
implementation of policies, rules and regulation, standards, programs, and projects for the
promotion and safeguarding of the health and sanitation in the region [] The Department of
Health (DOH), meanwhile, is responsible for setting the national standards on sanitation and
sewerage collection. On operating and maintaining sanitation and sewerage system, the
institutions responsible are the MWSS for Metro Manila along with the Manila Water Company
Inc. (MWCI) and Manila Water Services Inc. (MWSI). Outside of Metro Manila, management is
handled by the LWUA.
Policies on Sanitation Management
The government has enacted several laws, policies and guidelines on sanitation and proper
disposal of wastes. These policies are aimed to ensure the preservation of the environment,
secure the supply of clean water, and protect public health.
Table 1: Compilation of Relevant Laws, Policies and Guidelines on Sanitation in the
Philippines
Law, Policies and Guidelines

Year

Description

Sanitary Engineering Law (RA

1364)

195
5

The law mandates that only sanitary engineers are authorized

to carry out:
1. Sanitary surveys,
reports,
design,
direction,
management, consultation and investigation on water
and sanitation.
2. Professional research and laboratory work supporting
the activities on water and sanitation.

Provincial Water Utilities Act

(PD 198)

197
3

The decree establishes local water districts to provinces

throughout the country. This also includes responsibilities on

10 Asian Development Bank. (2013). Philippines Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Assessment, Strategy, and Road Map.
Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank.

11 Metro Manila Development Authority. (2016). MMDA's Scope of Services, its Functions and Powers. Retrieved June 3, 2016,
from Metro Manila Development Authority: http://www.mmda.gov.ph/index.php/10-transparency/6-mmda-s-scope-of-services-itsfunctions-and-powers

Page 5 of 14

managing sanitation.
Sewage Disposal Provisions
(IRR of PD 522)

197
4

The IRR sets the guidelines on waste disposal and sewage

collection and disposal.

Sanitation Code (PD 856)

197
5

The law sets provision on: Sewage Collection and Disposal,

Excreta Disposal and Drainage.

National Building Code

(PD 1096)

197
7

The law requires all buildings should have a wastewater

disposal system.

Sanitation and Drainage

Provisions (Local Government
Code RA 7160)

199
1

The law lays out the general powers and attributes of LGUs,
including sanitation and drainage.

Sanitation and Drainage

Provisions (Local Government
Code IRR)

199
2

The IRR articulates the responsibility of LGUs for delivery of

basic services and facilities such as sanitation and drainage.

National Policy on Urban

Sewerage and Sanitation
(NEDA Board Resolutions No.
12)

199
4

The resolution approves the recommendations of the

Infrastructure Committee on the national policy, strategy and
action plan for urban sewerage (liquid waste) and sanitation.

Official Definition of Sewerage

and Sanitation Terms (NEDA
Board Resolutions No. 12)

199
5

The resolution lay out the official definition of terms on relative

to water supply, sewerage and sanitation.

Sanitation Code IRR

199
5

The IRR gives specific guidelines on sewage collection and

disposal, excreta disposal and drainage.

Clean Water Act (RA 9275)

200
4

The law provides a comprehensive water quality management

and for other purposes.

Source: (Magtibay, 2006)

Resources and Funding
Financing agencies that provide the capital funds for sanitation and sewerage projects are the
LWUA, the Development Bank of the Philippines, Land Bank of the Philippines, the Municipal
Development Fund Office, and the Philippines Water Revolving Fund (PWRF) 12. A report from
the World Bank (2015) showed that the Philippines need an annual investment of USD 600
million. The anticipated investment overall is USD 450 million whilst actual recent events are
relatively low, totaling USD 100 million. The World Bank also explained that current and future
infrastructures on water and sanitation would need an estimated USD 324 million annually in
operation and maintenance expenditures13. 62% would be allocated to water supply whilst only
38% for sanitation.
12 Asian Development Bank. (2013). Philippines Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Assessment, Strategy, and Road Map.
Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank.

13 World Bank. (2015). Water Supply and Sanitation in the Philippines: Turning Finance into Services for the Future. Taguig City:
World Bank.

Page 6 of 14

Figure 1: Sector Financing: Required, Anticipated (2012-2014) and Recent Expenditures,

(2009-2011)

Source: (World Bank, 2015)

On the sanitation graph, it can be observed that most funds come from domestic sources, the
first is the government, second are from households themselves and last are the external
funders; these are multilateral banks such the ADB the World Bank and development agencies
such as Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and Deutsche Gesellschaft fr
Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) (Asian Development Bank, 2013).
Table 2: Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs for Sanitation
Subsector

O&M USD million/year

Rural sanitation

32

Urban sanitation

100

Sanitation total

132

Source: (World Bank, 2015)

The World Bank (2015) explained that in order for the country to meet its 2028 target on rural
sanitation it is estimated to require USD 182 million per year in expenditures. In addition, it will
also need USD 32 million annually in expenditures for operations and maintenance. In total,
financing requirements stands at USD 214 million per year. Anticipated investments are
expected to come from households (i.e. USD 20 million per year) and other domestic
stakeholders (i.e. USD 1 million per year). For Urban sanitation, in order to reach its target it
needs an estimated USD 537 million per year if according to the report, the USD 100 million per
year in operations and maintenance costs are considered in the analysis. The anticipated
investments will mostly be coming from households (USD 163 million per year) and other
domestic stakeholders (USD 284 million per year and external sources (USD 11 million per
year). However, the World Bank cautioned that there is no assurance on the investments of
households this is because current estimates favor Metro Manila and nearby urban areas14.
14 Ibid
Page 7 of 14

Figure 2: Rural and Urban Sanitation Investment Requirements

Source: (World Bank, 2015)

Implementation and Current Performance
The report of the Asian Development Bank (2013) found that despite existing policies on
sanitation, overall government spending on this sector has been low. Most of the population
such as the urban and rural poor still performs unsanitary practices such as improper hand
washing and open defecation. The latter is still common because of the lack of sewerage
systems in communities and toilets in households. The combined effects of this poor
performance and practices have resulted in the pollution of waterways and decrease on the
quality of life.
In December 2008 the Supreme Court ordered 10 government agencies including GOCCs to
clean up Manila Bay15. By 2011, the concessionaires had a total of 43 wastewater treatment
facilities. The effort increased investments for the expansion of the clean up to include Laguna
de Bay-Pasig River-Manila Bay watershed and other seven major rivers. LWUA was also
ordered by the Supreme Court that for water districts to coordinate with the DENR to provide,
install, operate, and maintain sewerage and sanitation facilities, and to institute efficient and
safe collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage and sanitation facilities, and to institute
efficient and safe collection, treatment and disposal of sewage in the provinces of Bataan
Bulacan, Cavite, Laguna, and Pampanga, where needed at the earliest possible time. (Asian
Development Bank, 2013)
The flowchart from the recent World Bank report (2015), based on percentages of the urban
population, shows that only 10% septage were safely disposed and/or treated. On the other
hand, an estimated 3% have no access to septic tanks, only an estimated 1% has septic tanks
with sewerage, 84% has septic tanks but with no sewerage, 9% use other on site methods, and
open defecation of 3%. Also, only an estimated 4% total of wastewater treated.
Figure 3: Urban Wastewater and Septage Flow

15 Asian Development Bank. (2013). Philippines Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Assessment, Strategy, and Road Map.
Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank.

Page 8 of 14

Source: (World Bank, 2015)

Until today, only a few sewerage systems exist outside of Metro Manila and serve less than 35% of the service area population. Cities that have these infrastructures are Baguio, Vigan and
Zamboanga. The rest of the domestic wastewater, however, remain untreated and most are
eventually pollute rivers and other bodies of water. Few LGUs have adopted ordinances on
septage management and constructed sewage treatment facilities16. Workshops have been
conducted by the PWRF to provide technical assistance to these LGUs. In 2003, the Asian
Development Bank in its report (2015) assessed that there is limited progress on sanitation
management outside of Metro Manila.
According to the National Demographic Health Survey (NDHS), around 37 million or 79% of the
population had access to improved sanitation facilities in 2008. These facilities were pour-flush
toilets to septic tank (53%) and wet pits (16%). However, 15% of the rural population had no
access to improved facilities. Still, over the past decades, government estimates has shown an
annual increase of 1.3% in access rates between 1993 and 2008. The JMPs estimates
meanwhile stands at an annual increase of 1.2%. In 2010, DOH announced the adoption of a
policy and national program known as the Zero Open Defecation programme. SALINTUBIG
program of the DILG focuses only on water supply. Anecdotal evidence according to the World
Bank (2015) is generally restricted to some bowls and bags of cement. In addition, the reported
stated that there is no financing targets or coordination mechanisms for domestic and donor
expenditures (World Bank, 2015). Most of small projects are funded by external agencies and
only little from the domestic private sector.
Joint Monitoring Report of WHO and UNICEF
The JMP was established in 1990, to monitor the changes, in countries, regions and the world
on its MDG target on water and sanitation. It created a database that presents analysis not
limited on the indicators within the MDG, but also many other parameters. The annual report of
JMP helped shed light on the nature of progress and the extent to which the ambition and
vision of the MDGs have been achieved (United Nations Children's Emergency Fund and
World Health Organization, 2015). It has also helped identify priorities that need to be
addressed by the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Key facts from the JMP for 2015 reported that the MDG target of 77% coverage for sanitation
was not met. Despite, missing the set target, significant progress was made by countries. The
JMP reported that as of 2015, 68% of the global population now uses an improved sanitation
16 Ibid
Page 9 of 14

facility. Between 1990 and 2015, a total of 2.1 billion has benefited from improved sanitation.
However, in 2015, it still estimated that 2.4 billion people have no access to improved facilities
whilst 946 million defecate in the open17. In Southeastern Asia, 176 million people have no
access to the aforementioned facilities (United Nations Children's Emergency Fund and World
Health Organization, 2015). The Philippines, according to the JMP (2015) has made good
progress towards attaining the MDG goal on water and sanitation 18. In using of sanitation
facilities, according to data from the JMP, it showed that in areas the country has improved
starting with 57% in 1990 and has met 74% by 2015. Data from the World Bank (2015) also
showed that the country has improved in its sanitation coverage, both urban and rural. The
trend has shown that annually it has continued to increase by 1.5 and 1.3%, respectively.
Figure 4: Sanitation Coverage (Rural and Urban)

Source: (World Bank, 2015)

Recommendations of Development Agencies
The ADB (2013) World Bank (2015) has drawn recommendations for the improvement of both
rural and urban sanitation. In the sub-sector of rural sanitation, the report explained that the
country needs to effectively implement the Zero Defecation Program of the DOH. It was also
emphasized that it should be within the framework of an equitable rural sanitation and promotion
policy. Another is to develop a financing strategy that would address: (a) for public investments
to generate household demand for sanitation; (b) output-based subsidies to the very poor and
collective incentives to local communities and their respective LGUs towards achieving the DOH
program. Last is to promote rural sanitation through various poverty alleviation programmes
such as the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program (4Ps) and the BUB and Community
Development Driven Program.
17 United Nations Children's Emergency Fund and World Health Organization. (2015). Progress on Sanitation and Drinking Water:
2015 Update and MDG Assessment. Geneva: United Nations.

18 Ibid
Page 10 of 14

In the urban sanitation sub-sector, first recommendation is to effectively implement the National
Sewerage and Septage Management Program (NSSMP) and to increase accountability in all
levels of governance on sanitation services. Another is to develop a sound investment
framework and to adopt city sanitation plans along with measures to improve cost recovery and
expand services to the poor. In addition, is the need to adopt a cost-effective approach to
investments that will gradually expand and improve current sewerage systems and excreta
management. Last is to build local capacities to ensure successful planning and implementation
of the NSSMP.
On the national level the ADB (2013) also recommends using the Philippine Sustainable
Sanitation Roadmap and Plan (PSSRP) of the DOH and NEDA as the basis in future planning
and implementation on sanitation. According to the report this can be done using five strategies
(Asian Development Bank, 2013) these are: (a) responsive sanitation governance and
regulatory strengthening; (b) improve service delivery through communication and capacity
development, (c) strengthened coordination and/or alliance with stakeholders; (d) adequate
financing and infrastructure investments; and (e) sanitation response in cases of emergencies.
These strategies are translated into priority programs which are in the context of Philippine
Development Plans in the future.
Conclusion
The Philippines performance in achieving the MDG goals has shown promising progress
despite missing its target by 2015. Still, the government and its succeeding administrations have
implemented programs that were able to improve sanitation management in both rural and
urban. The progress is evident in the JMP of WHO and UNICEF, which reported that the
Philippines have made good progress towards meeting the MDG target. Moreover the
government has established several laws, policies and programs aimed at improving sanitation
to its citizens. However, based on the observations of development agencies such as the ADB
and the World Bank, several gaps were identified particularly on having a streamlined
institutional arrangement on sanitation management. Further, both agencies concurred that the
country lacks political will and adequate funding on sanitation. There are remaining outstanding
issues that need to be addressed such as open defecation, unorganized and underdeveloped
sewerage system. As a response, the government has formulated programs and implemented
projects to address these issues. Based on the data and reports, the country is on track towards
attaining its national targets and in future targets such as the SDGs.

Page 11 of 14

Bibliography
Asian Development Bank. (2004). The Garbage Book: Solid Waste Management in Metro
Manila. Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank.
Asian Development Bank. (2013). Philippines Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Assessment,
Strategy, and Road Map. Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank.
de Albuquerque, C. (undated). On the Right Track: Good practices in realising the rights to
water and sanitation. New York: United Nations.
de Lemps, H. (2001). Waters in Nineteenth Century Manila. Philippine Studies(49), 488-517.
Loughborough University. (undated). Introduction to Water and Sanitation Projects. Retrieved
May 22, 2016, from Loughborough University:
http://www.lboro.ac.uk/well/resources/Publications/guidance-manual/chapter-1.pdf
Magtibay, B. B. (2006). Philippine Regulations on Sanitation and Wastewater Systems. 2006:
B.B. Magtibay's Publishing House.
Metro Manila Development Authority. (2016). MMDA's Scope of Services, its Functions and
Powers. Retrieved June 3, 2016, from Metro Manila Development Authority:
http://www.mmda.gov.ph/index.php/10-transparency/6-mmda-s-scope-of-services-itsfunctions-and-powers
United Nations. (2013). Millenium Development Goals: Background. Retrieved June 3, 2016,
from United Nations: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/bkgd.shtml
United Nations. (2016). Monitoring Water and Sanitation in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development: An Introduction. New York: United Nations.
Page 12 of 14

United Nations Children's Emergency Fund and World Health Organization. (2015). Progress
on Sanitation and Drinking Water: 2015 Update and MDG Assessment. Geneva: United
Nations.
United Nations Economic and Social Council. (2002). General Comment No. 15. New York:
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
World Bank. (2003). Urban Sewerage and Sanitation: Lessons learned from case studies in the
Philippines. Makati City: World Bank.
World Bank. (2015). Water Supply and Sanitation in the Philippines: Turning Finance into
Services for the Future. Taguig City: World Bank.
World Health Organization. (2015). Key facts from JMP 2015 report. Retrieved May 27, 2016,
from World Health Organization:
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/monitoring/jmp-2015-key-facts/en/
World Health Organization. (2016). Water Sanitation and Health (WSH). Retrieved June 3,
2016, from World Health Organization:
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/mdg1/en/

Page 13 of 14