**Table 2:** **_Big Range among SAR Countries in Access to Infrastructure Services_**

||_Avg. GDP_<br>_growth_<br>_(2000-_<br>_2012)_<sup>_1_</sup>|_Urbanization_<br>_Rate_<br>_(2012)_|_Telecom_<br>_Access_<br>_(per 100_<br>_people)_<br>_(2011)_<sup>_2_</sup>|_Electricity_<br>_Access_<br>_(% of pop.)_<br>_(2010)_<sup>_3_</sup>|_Access to_<br>_Improved_<br>_Sanitation_<br>_(% of pop.)_<br>_(2011)_<sup>_4_</sup>|_Access to_<br>_Improved Water_<br>_(% of pop.)_<br>_(2011)_<sup>_5_</sup>|_Total Road_<br>_Network_<br>_(km per 1000_<br>_people)_<sup>_6_</sup>|_% Paved_<br>_Roads_<sup>_7_</sup>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|SAR|6.7|31|72|71|39|91|2.9|51|
|AFG|8.7|24|54|30|29|61|1.6|29|
|BGD|5.9|29|58|47|55|83|0.1|10|
|BTN|8.7|36|69|65|45|97|9.7|40|
|IND|7.1|32|75|75|35|92|3.5|50|
|MDV|7.0|42|173|95|98|99|0.3|100|
|NPL|4.0|17|47|76|35|88|0.8|54|
|PAK|4.4|37|65|67|47|91|1.5|72|
|LKA|5.5|15|104|77|91|93|5.5|81|
|Brazil|3.3|85|145|99|81|97|8.1|14|
|China|10.2|52|94|100|65|92|3.0|54|

_Source:_ World Development Indicators, except when noted otherwise. _Notes:_ 1. The average GDP growth for AFG is for the period 2002-2009; 2. Telecom access is defined as the number of fixed and mobile lines; 3. World Energy Outlook 2010 by International Energy Association, except BTN and MDV, which are based on authors’ estimations; 4. Improved sanitation is defined as connection to a public sewer, a septic system, pour-flush latrine, simple pit latrine, and ventilated improved pit latrine; 5. Improved water is defined as household connection, public standpipe, borehole, protected dug well, protected spring, rainwater collection; 6. Varying data years: 2005 (MDV), 2006 (Afghanistan), 2008 (IND, NPL), 2010 (BGD, BTN, PAK, LKA, Brazil, China); 7. Varying data years: 2003 (LKA), 2005 (MDV), 2006 (Afghanistan), 2008 (IND, NPL, China), 2010 (BGD, BTN, PAK, Brazil).

# **3.3 Heterogeneity in Infrastructure Coverage within Each SAR Country**

**There is significant heterogeneity within countries and between sectors.** Using district level data from the entire SAR region, districts were ranked by quintiles on access to electricity, gas, improved water, improved sanitation and telecoms respectively.<sup>10</sup> The heterogeneity on access to infrastructure services is not just among SAR countries but also among districts within the countries. For example, in India, some of the best performing districts on access to improved water sources are in the north and north west of the country, while some of the worst performing ones are in the north east and west as well as the southwest coast.

**Within India, even bordering districts show big variations.** An interesting example on access to improved sanitation is found on the north of India, where some of the worst performing districts in the country are in-between some of the best performing districts. In access to electricity, some of the districts in Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and Punjab are among the best performing districts, while those in Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa, and Uttar Pradesh are among the worst performing districts. Furthermore, districts that perform well on access to one infrastructure service do not necessarily perform well on others. For example, districts in Kerala are high performers in access to improved sanitation but among the worst on access to improved water sources.

> 10 The fifth quintile on access to an infrastructure services represents the 20 percent of SAR districts with the highest access to that infrastructure service, while the first quintile represents the 20 percent of SAR districts with the lowest access to the same infrastructure service.

8