Skip to Main Content
Table 3

Comparison of access to sanitation

Access criteriaeThekwiniJohannesburgCape Town
  • 1. Measurable disparities in access (across race, gender, settlement type)

 
Female-headed black African households in traditional areas and urban informal settlements least likely to have access 
  • 2. Percentage of informal HHs with a ‘basic sanitation facilitya’; (percentage of all HHs with a ‘basic sanitation facility’)

 
37.4 (83.5) 41.9 (96.9) 53.2 (91.8) 
  • 3. Needs of vulnerable groups considered including MHM

 
No No No 
  • 4. Fair decision-making including accessibility to data

 
No No No 
Access criteriaeThekwiniJohannesburgCape Town
  • 1. Measurable disparities in access (across race, gender, settlement type)

 
Female-headed black African households in traditional areas and urban informal settlements least likely to have access 
  • 2. Percentage of informal HHs with a ‘basic sanitation facilitya’; (percentage of all HHs with a ‘basic sanitation facility’)

 
37.4 (83.5) 41.9 (96.9) 53.2 (91.8) 
  • 3. Needs of vulnerable groups considered including MHM

 
No No No 
  • 4. Fair decision-making including accessibility to data

 
No No No 

Sources:Truyens et al. (2013), CCT (2014), EM (2014) and Stats SA (2014, 2015); data from Johannesburg Water covering water and sanitation in informal settlements from 2013 to 2014.

aChemical, container and bucket toilets were not considered to meet standards for ‘basic sanitation’ by the author since they did not hygienically separate users from excreta.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal