|**Table 3. Human Opportunity Index for Eg**<br>**_Opportunity_**|**ypt, Urban 2**<br>**_2000_**|**000 and**<br>**_Circa_**<br>**_2009_**|**2009**<br>**_Annual_**<br>**_rate of_**|**_Deco_**<br>|**_mposition_**<br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||||**_change_**|**_Access_**|**_Equality of_**<br>**_opportunity_**|
|Completeprimaryeducation on time|92|88|-0.6%|84%|16%|
|Complete secondaryeducation on time|76|69|-0.7%|92%|8%|
|School attendance,9-15|---|92|---|---|---|
|Water|97|96|0.0%|53%|47%|
|Sanitation|68|74|0.7%|95%|5%|
|Lightingenergysource|100|100|0.0%|62%|38%|
|Cookingenergysource|94|99|0.6%|60%|40%|
|Non-overcrowding,0-5|58|64|0.7%|50%|50%|
|Telephone|38|84|5.1%|79%|21%|
|Assisted birth delivery|83|93|1.2%|64%|36%|
|Post-natal care,0-5|23|33|1.2%|92%|8%|
|Prenatal care,0-4|76|87|1.3%|76%|24%|
|Immunization vaccines,0-4|84|85|0.1%|---|---|
|Non-wasting,0-4|88|74|-1.7%|85%|15%|
|Non-stunting,2-17|78|72|-0.8%|---|---|
|Non-underweight,0-17|86|88|0.3%|57%|43%|
|_Aggregate HOIs_||||||
|IOHa9-15-HousingServices|83|94|1.2%|60%|40%|
|IOHa0-4-HousingServices|77|92|1.7%|63%|37%|
|IOHa0-4-Nutrition & ECD|17|16|-0.1%|---|---|
|<br>_Source_: HIECS 2000 and 2009 surveys, EDH|S 2000 and 2|008, and|authors’ c|alculatio|ns.|

_Narrowing the Urban-Rural Opportunity Gap_ . Between 1999/2000 and 2008/09, the urban-rural opportunity gap contracted for basic housing services and education, but remained unchanged for nutrition opportunities. This was caused not only by much faster improvement in the average HOI in rural areas, but also by the fact that most rural HOIs improved at a faster pace while eleven urban HOIs had little progress or deteriorated.<sup>25</sup> Basically, the average rate of progress of rural HOIs more than doubled the urban annual rate (1.4 versus 0.5 points) and the aggregate rural HOIs for basic housing services for 9-15 and 0-4 year olds increased by 42 and 41 points, while the same urban HOIs increased by 11 and 15 points respectively. Although telephone access was by far the opportunity with the largest improvement in both urban and rural areas, the annual rates of improvement were faster in rural areas (6.3 versus 5.1). Similar comparisons, in terms of annual rates of improvement, apply to opportunities such as prenatal care, assisted birth delivery, cooking energy source, and overcrowding. Three opportunities that remained stagnant in urban areas showed moderate improvement in rural areas, namely, access to water and completion of primary and secondary education (respectively by 14, 7, and 7 points). In only three cases – completion of postsecondary education, sanitation, and immunization vaccines – urban improvement was marginally

> 25 Only three of the urban HOI indicators – lighting energy source, water, and cooking energy source – approached universal coverage and had reached 100, 97, and 94 points, respectively by 2000. Three other stagnant urban HOIs were completion of primary education, sanitation and immunization-vaccines. A major cause of concern is the deterioration in the HOIs for nutrition non-wasting and non-stunting by 14 and 6 points, respectivel, and the HOIs for primary and secondary education by 4 and 7 points, respectively.

14