Skip to main content

Rapid Review of Disability and Older Age Inclusion in Humanitarian WASH Interventions

Countries
World
Sources
ELRHA
Publication date
Origin
View original

AUTHORED BY INDEPENDENT CONSULTANTS

DANIELLE RICHARD (LEAD CONSULTANT)
danielle.d.richard@gmail.com
SHIRIN KIANI
shirineykiani@yahoo.ca

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Purpose of this document

Elrha is a global charity that finds solutions to complex humanitarian problems through research and innovation. Elrha identified a knowledge gap in good practices and innovation for how people with disabilities and older people are included in water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) interventions in humanitarian contexts. To support a new area of focus under their Humanitarian Innovation Fund (the HIF) on Disability and Older Age Inclusion (DOAI), Elrha commissioned an independent rapid review to review the inclusion of people with disabilities and older people in humanitarian WASH interventions.

Background

People with disabilities and older people make up significant population groups, however, they are disproportionately affected by and amongst the most marginalised in humanitarian response. In contexts of disasters, conflict or unrest, access to water and sanitation can be severely impacted, increasing vulnerability to disease and death. Access to clean water and sanitation is recognised as a fundamental human right, and numerous human rights frameworks further affirm equal rights for people with disabilities and older people (aged over 60). Though, evidence suggests they are at a disproportionately greater risk of not having adequate access to water and sanitation. To promote inclusive humanitarian action, the Age and Disability Capacity Programme (ADCAP) consortium developed the Humanitarian Inclusion Standards (HIS). The HIS consists of nine key inclusion standards and sets sectorspecific standards, including for the WASH sector. The WASH inclusion standards are structured around three key dimensions of inclusion: 1) Collection of Information, 2) Addressing Barriers and 3) Participation and Resilience.

Methodology

The Rapid Review adopted qualitative methods including a secondary data desk review and key informant interviews (KIIs). The comprehensive desk review included a review of available reports, documents, evaluations, literature and any other content found related to inclusive practices in humanitarian WASH interventions. In addition to an online search, WASH and DOAI actors were solicited to share relevant documents and some were purposefully selected for KIIs. Out of 24,682 documents identified, 160 were screened, 101 were eligible and 35 were included in the review. The Humanitarian Inclusion Standards (HIS) were used as a common framework for analysis. As such, the findings are structured around the HIS. The limitations of the Rapid Review included a lack of available literature on inclusive WASH interventions in humanitarian contexts and challenges faced in arranging KIIs with some of the identified stakeholders. Thus, the findings reflect practices from available interventions, which are likely not exhaustive and not reflective of all the inclusive WASH interventions implemented in humanitarian action.