CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 33Water Resource Management and QualityWater Governance and InfrastructureGender, Education, and Development Issues

Women and community water supply programmes: An analysis from a socio‐cultural perspective.

Singh, Nandita, Jacks, Gunnar, Bhattacharya, Prosun·2005·Natural Resources Forum
DOI 10.1111/j.1477-8947.2005.00131.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Community water supply programmes are seen as instrumental in achieving the goal of ‘safe’ water for all. Women, a principal target group of these programmes, are to be benefited with greater convenience, enhanced socio-cultural opportunities and better health for themselves and their families, provided through improved water facilities. Water supply programmes largely consist of three essential components, namely: technology, people and institutions. Although such programmes are intended to benefit women members of local communities, scant attention is paid to the impacts of the socio-cultural context of the community on these programmes. This article explores the influence of social and cultural intricacies on the implementation of community water supply programmes, and assesses their effectiveness. The article offers important lessons for the design and implementation of this type of programme. It concludes that the local socio-cultural context sets the stage for programme implementation, being a dynamic factor that determines actual access to water sources, more so than mere physical availability, which is often used as a criterion for programme performance. The article stresses the urgent need to integrate socio-cultural factors as a fourth dimension in designing community water supply programmes, and suggests practical measures for enhancing the effectiveness of such programmes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1477-8947.2005.00131.x

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In Bangladesh, Ghana, India, Kenya, and Uganda, governments and organizations that set up community water and sanitation committees have required the inclusion of women or encouraged and supported women's participation.

    “In Bangladesh, [177] Ghana, [83] India, [80, 106, 145, 180] Kenya, [61] and Uganda, [102] governments and organizations that set up community water and sanitation committees have required the inclusion of women [61,80,83,102,106,180] or encouraged and supported women's participation [145,177].”

    From Water, sanitation, and women’s empowerment: A systematic review and qualitative metasynthesis (2022) · cites this paper as [180]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Singh, N., Jacks, G., & Bhattacharya, P.
Affiliations
KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
ORCID
Venue
Natural Resources Forum
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-08
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
213-223
ISSN
  • 0165-0203 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-8947
DOI
10.1111/j.1477-8947.2005.00131.x
OpenAlex
W1964703683
Cited by
33
References
20
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 3683 d)
Locations
Natural Resources Forum (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Water Resource Management and Quality
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Water Governance and Infrastructure
  • Social Sciences › Education › Gender, Education, and Development Issues
Keywords
community water supply, women, sociocultural context, program effectiveness, program design and implementation, gender and water, water institutions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review