A/HRC/45/10 10. It is important to clarify that the levels reflected on the ladders do not include some elements of the normative content, namely affordability, acceptability, privacy and dignity. Also, the operationalization of the indicators for targets 6.1 and 6.2 does not capture the human rights principles of affordability, equality and non-discrimination. 9 Due to these limitations, monitoring States’ progress through the ladders, or the indicators, cannot be considered as synonymous with the progressive realization of the human rights to water and sanitation but, rather, as a proxy to it. 11. By virtue of its definition, a ladder signals that States are expected to start at the lowest rung and move up towards the top rung, which represents the highest level of access possible. However, a State does not need to climb each rung of the ladder. Taking an example from the handwashing ladder: starting from the lowest rung, where there are no handwashing facilities, it is not necessary to take the intermediate step of making a new facility available without soap and water – a State can jump that rung by making available a facility where soap and water are also available. This simple example implies much more complexity when it comes to the water and sanitation ladders. If a State plans to climb all rungs, it may be required to invest twice in two different systems. For sanitation, as an example, one technology (e.g., pit latrines) cannot easily be converted into another (e.g., sewers), which means that the lower rung system may need to be abandoned in order to move to the higher rung. Therefore, progressively reaching higher levels of services calls for adequate planning that is grounded in a human rights framework. 12. There are various combinations of types of service, and each type of service combined with a different management model presents unique solutions. However, all solutions have different implications on the human rights to water and sanitation. As the Special Rapporteur has illustrated previously, there are no perfect water and sanitation services and many types can be adequate if they comply with human rights standards, taking into account their “appropriateness” to the specific circumstances. 10 Conversely, some types – even if placed on the highest rung of the ladder – might not be compliant and might even provide outcomes far from human rights standards. An example is when the solution is piped water or sewerage and the price charged to users is very high, affecting the affordability of access, notably for people living in poverty. B. Towards equal access: horizontal realization 13. The ladder used to monitor implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, or the vertical approach to the progressive realization, reflects – to a certain extent – the underlying spirit of the progressive realization and partially addresses their normative content. However, with its focus on the levels of water supply, sanitation and hygiene services, the ladder alone is insufficient to assess all elements of the human rights to water and sanitation. 14. Therefore, the need for States to move beyond the minimum provision of water and sanitation and to progressively realize the related rights should not be seen as merely moving up the water supply, sanitation and hygiene ladder, particularly if this is only for part of the population. Rather, progressive realization points towards the need for States to take stock of the current situation of compliance with the human rights to water and sanitation and identify how best to achieve the adequate level of services for all without discrimination. Such a horizontal approach implies devising plans and schemes that aim to reduce the gaps in access to water and sanitation among individuals and groups. Furthermore, the horizontal approach is inclusive and encompasses elements beyond the normative content of the human rights to water and sanitation. More clearly than the vertical approach, it emphasizes human rights principles, including accountability, access to information, participation, prevention and the right to remedy. An example of a possible approach was reported in Colombia, where different schemes for rural and urban areas were 9 10 4 See www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Water/OpenLetter_WHO_UNICEF_WASH.pdf. A/70/203. See also Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, general comment No. 3, paras. 4–5.